United States of America v. Lorenzo Grado-Meza

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LORENZO GRADO-MEZA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-50094
D.C. No. 3:13-cr-03866-BEN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 21, 2015**
Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Lorenzo Grado-Meza appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
* 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).
FILED
JAN 27 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 14-50094
Grado-Meza contends that the district court procedurally erred by
(1) “triple-counting” Grado-Meza’s prior convictions, (2) focusing exclusively on
deterrence and protection of the public, and (3) failing to explain adequately its
reasons for rejecting Grado-Meza’s mitigating arguments and imposing the
above-Guidelines sentence. These contentions fail. The court did not err by
varying upward based on Grado-Meza’s criminal history. See United States v.
Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1100-01 (9th Cir. 2013) (court may vary upward based
on factors already incorporated into the Guidelines calculations). Moreover, the
record reflects that the court considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and
sufficiently explained the reasons for imposing the sentence. See United States v.
Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Grado-Meza also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Grado-Meza's sentence.
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The above-Guidelines sentence
is substantively reasonable in light of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the
totality of the circumstances, including Grado-Meza’s criminal and immigration
history. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587
F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a

-- 2 of 3 --

3 14-50094
particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --