United States of America v. Hector Rangel-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). Accordingly, the
Defendant’s request for oral argument is denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HECTOR RANGEL-LOPEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-50068
D.C. No. 3:09-cr-02439-BEN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Hector Rangel-Lopez appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United
States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
FILED
FEB 23 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-50068 2
§ 1291, and we affirm.
Rangel-Lopez contends that the district court imposed a substantively
unreasonable sentence under United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050
(9th Cir. 2009). Amezcua-Vasquez is limited to the “specific set of facts presented”
in that case. Id. at 1058. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range in this
case is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
Rangel-Lopez also contends that the district court abused its discretion in
selecting a sentence within the range dictated by the enhancement under U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2 based on recidivism concerns. The district court properly considered the
need for adequate deterrence in assessing whether a sentence within the enhanced
Guidelines range was sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to achieve the
goals of sentencing. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d at 1055
(stating that reasonableness of sentence within the enhanced Guidelines range is to
be determined in light of the section 3553(a) factors); United States v. Orozco-
Acosta, 607 F.3d 1156, 1166-67 (9th Cir. 2010) (affirming a sentence within the
enhanced Guidelines range, in light of the district court’s findings that the sentence
was necessary to protect the public and to deter a subsequent reentry).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --