United States of America v. Nelson Miranda-Lopez

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
NELSON MIRANDA-LOPEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50171
D.C. No. 3:10-cr-03497-DMS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2012**
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Nelson Miranda-Lopez appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in
violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and
FILED
MAY 21 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50171 2
we affirm.
Miranda-Lopez first contends that the district court procedurally erred by
failing to explain adequately the reasons for its sentence. This contention is belied
by the record, which shows that the district court adequately explained its reasons
for the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008)
(en banc).
Miranda-Lopez also contends that his sentence is substantively
unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) factors, the sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --