United States of America v. Winston Alexander Aarons

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
WINSTON ALEXANDER AARONS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Nos. 11-10291
11-10292
D.C. Nos. 2:10-cr-00382-JCM
2:11-cr-00017-JCM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Winston Alexander Aarons appeals from the
46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a
deported alien found unlawfully in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
FILED
JAN 19 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10291 2
§ 1326, and from the eight-month sentence imposed following revocation of
supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Aarons contends that his 46-month sentence is substantively unreasonable
under United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2009), given the
staleness of his prior conviction, and his subsequent lack of drug trafficking
convictions. The bottom-of-the-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in
light of the totality of the circumstances and the sentencing factors set forth in 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108-
09 (9th Cir. 2010) (district court did not abuse its discretion by applying 16-level
enhancement where section 3553(a) factors supported within-Guidelines sentence).
Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to vary
downward on the basis of the proposed amendments to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b). See
United States v. Ruiz-Apolonio, 657 F.3d 907, 917-18 (9th Cir. 2011).
Aarons also contends that his eight-month sentence is substantively
unreasonable because the district court declined to make it a fully concurrent
sentence. The bottom-of-the-Guidelines, partially concurrent sentence is
substantively reasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v. Miqbel, 444
F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --