United States of America v. JULIO CESAR GARCIA-CASTANEDA, AKA Julio Cesar Garcia-Castaneda, AKA Julio Garcia-Torres

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JULIO CESAR GARCIA-CASTANEDA,
AKA Julio Cesar Garcia-Castaneda, AKA
Julio Garcia-Torres,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-10052
D.C. No.
4:17-cr-00405-CKJ-LAB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 15, 2019 **
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Julio Cesar Garcia-Castaneda appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 40-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JUL 17 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-10052
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Garcia-Castaneda contends that the district court abused its discretion by
rejecting the parties’ plea agreement. We disagree. The district court acted within
its discretion because it thoroughly detailed its individualized reasons for rejecting
the plea agreement, including Garcia-Castaneda’s extensive and violent criminal
history. See United States v. Harris, 679 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2012).
Garcia-Castaneda next contends that the district court erred by determining
that his criminal history warranted an upward departure. We review the district
court’s decision to depart from the Guidelines as part of our overall review of the
substantive reasonableness of the sentence. See United States v. Ellis, 641 F.3d
411, 421-22 (9th Cir. 2011). The sentence here is not an abuse of discretion in
light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances,
including Garcia-Castaneda’s significant criminal and immigration history. See
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Moreover, contrary to Garcia-
Castaneda’s contention, the district court’s findings regarding the seriousness of
his criminal history were not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Graf, 610
F.3d 1148, 1157 (9th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --