United States of America v. Lam Hoang Lai

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).
AH/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LAM HOANG LAI,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-50117
D.C. No. 8:08-cr-00056-AG
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Lam Hoang Lai appeals from his below-the-Guidelines 87-month sentence
imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of child pornography,
FILED
MAR 03 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AH/Research 09-50117
in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Lai contends that the district court procedurally erred when it failed to
consider the disparity between the recommended Guidelines sentence and the
maximum sentence he could have received if convicted of the same conduct in a
California state court. This argument is foreclosed by United States v. Ringgold,
571 F.3d 948, 951 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that “the district court does not commit
procedural error in its [section] 3553(a) analysis if it does not consider disparities
between state and federal sentences for the same criminal conduct”).
Lai also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The
record reflects that, under the totality of the circumstances, Lai’s 87-month
sentence is not substantively unreasonable. United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984,
991-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); see also Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338
(2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --