United States of America v. Martin Estrella-Romero

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Honorable Marvin E. Aspen, Senior United States District Judge**
for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation.
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
MARTIN ESTRELLA-ROMERO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10607
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-02848-JGZ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Marvin E. Aspen, District Judge, Presiding**
Submitted December 19, 2012***
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Martin Estrella-Romero appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 48-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
FILED
JAN 02 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10607 2
re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Estrella-Romero contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in
light of the age of his prior drug trafficking offense and because the district court
gave undue weight to the length of the sentence imposed for that offense. The
district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Estrella-Romero’s sentence.
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The district court acknowledged
that Estrella-Romero had not committed any non-immigration offenses since his
drug trafficking conviction and varied downward from the Guidelines range by 15
months. The below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See
id. Furthermore, the district court’s discussion of the length of Estrella-Romero’s
prior sentence reflected proper concern for deterrence and Estrella-Romero’s lack
of respect for the law.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --