United States of America v. Rafael Machuca-Preciado

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RAFAEL MACHUCA-PRECIADO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 23-470
D.C. No.
2:22-cr-00042-MKD-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Mary K. Dimke, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 17, 2024**
Before: S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Rafael Machuca-Preciado appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 18-month term of imprisonment and 3-year term of supervised
release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien in the
United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JAN 24 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 23-470
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Machuca-Preciado contends that the district court procedurally erred by
failing to review or consider the support letters that Machuca-Preciado submitted
to demonstrate his family ties in the United States. We review for plain error, see
United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and
conclude there is none. The court’s remarks at sentencing suggest that it reviewed
the letters and found that they did not support Machuca-Preciado’s representations
of himself as a father. However, even assuming the court did not review the
letters, Machuca-Preciado has not shown any effect on his substantial rights. See
United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir. 2008). The record reflects
that the district court considered Machuca-Preciado’s arguments regarding his
family ties but believed that a within-Guidelines sentence was nevertheless
warranted in light of Machuca-Preciado’s significant immigration history, his
failure to be deterred by a prior sentence for illegal reentry, his repeated violations
of a restraining order, and his strong incentives to return to the United States.
Thus, Machuca-Preciado has not shown a reasonable probability that he would
have received a different sentence absent the alleged error. See id. at 762.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --