United States of America v. Jose Jesus Cortez

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JOSE JESUS CORTEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50531
D.C. No. 3:10-cr-00257-BEN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jose Jesus Cortez appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed following
his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8
U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
SEP 21 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50531 2
Cortez contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. He argues
that the district court should have granted a downward departure because the
Guidelines range overrepresents his criminal history and because his prior felony
conviction, which triggered a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A), is stale. The sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range 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 Gall v. United States, 552
U.S. 38, 51, (2007); United States v. Tankersley, 537 F.3d 1100, 1113 (9th Cir.
2008) (“After Booker, the scheme of downward and upward departures has been
replaced by the requirement that judges impose a reasonable sentence.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --