United States of America v. Oscar Rene Monjaraz-Pinto

* 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. 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
OSCAR RENE MONJARAZ-PINTO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10620
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-03612-DCB-
JJM-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 18, 2013 **
San Francisco, California
Before: NOONAN, TASHIMA, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Defendant Oscar Rene Monjaraz-Pinto appeals his conviction for illegal
reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and the resulting sentence of
63 months’ imprisonment. We affirm.
FILED
JAN 23 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
1. The district court did not err in holding that Defendant failed to make a
prima facie showing of the affirmative defense of duress. Defendant’s fears of
poor treatment by police and prison officials were not akin to persecutors who
"figuratively held a gun to his head." United States v. Vasquez-Landaver, 527
F.3d 798, 802 (9th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks omitted).
2. As Defendant now concedes, the district court correctly applied the 16-
level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2. United States v. Flores-Mejia, 687
F.3d 1213, 1215–16 (9th Cir. 2012); United States v. Bonilla-Montenegro, 331
F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003).
3. Defendant’s sentence at the low end of the Guidelines range was
substantively reasonable. United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 996 (9th Cir. 2008)
(en banc).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --