United States of America v. Adelin Velasquez-Aguilar

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ADELIN VELASQUEZ-AGUILAR,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10363
D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00451-FRZ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 17, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Adelin Velasquez-Aguilar appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8
U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
JUL 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10363 2
Velasquez-Aguilar first contends that the district court procedurally erred by
failing to explain the reasons for the sentence and its rejection of his mitigating
arguments, and by failing to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors.
The record reflects that the district court reviewed all of the evidence submitted,
listened to the mitigating arguments, and considered the section 3553(a) sentencing
factors. Nothing more was required. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358-
59 (2007). Velasquez-Aguilar further contends that the district court failed to
appreciate its discretion to vary downward based on the nature of his prior
conviction for transporting illegal aliens. This contention is not supported by the
record.
Velasquez-Aguilar finally contends that his sentence is substantively
unreasonable. Under the totality of the circumstances, including Velasquez-
Aguilar’s criminal history and two previous deportations, the sentence 17 months
below the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a);
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --