United States of America v. Dario Gonzalez-Favela

16-50114Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit3 de jul. de 2017

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DARIO GONZALEZ-FAVELA,
Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 16-50114
16-50124
D.C. Nos. 3:15-cr-02884-LAB
3:12-cr-01420-LAB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2017**
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Dario Gonzalez-Favela appeals the 63-month
sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a
removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the 12-month consecutive
sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. 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 3 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-50114 & 16-50124
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Gonzalez-Favela contends that the district court erred by denying the
parties’ joint recommendation for a fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1
because it failed to engage in a comparative analysis of Gonzalez-Favela relative to
other defendants with a criminal history category of VI who nevertheless received
a fast-track departure. The court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v.
Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1178 (9th Cir. 2015) (fast-track departure is
“purely discretionary”). The record reflects that the court properly denied the
departure based on the particular factors of Gonzalez-Favela’s case, including the
court’s previous grant of a fast-track departure to Gonzalez-Favela, and his
extensive immigration and criminal history. See id. at 1183-84. Moreover, the
aggregate 75-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.