United States v. Rico , 398 F. App'x 245 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             OCT 04 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 06-50700
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. CR-06-00583-RGK
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    FERNANDO HUERTA RICO,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted September 13, 2010 **
    Before:        SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Fernando Huerta Rico appeals from the 84-month sentence imposed
    following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported 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).
    Rico contends that the district court erred by applying a drug trafficking
    enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) because two prior felony
    convictions allegedly occurred when Rico was a juvenile. This contention fails
    because Rico admitted to having been convicted for the offenses as an adult. See
    U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, cmt. n. 1(A)(iv); see also United States v. Flores, 
    172 F.3d 695
    ,
    700–01 (9th Cir. 1999) (defendant waived challenge by expressly agreeing to
    enhancement). Even if it was true that the offenses occurred when he was a
    juvenile, it is undisputed that he agreed that he was prosecuted as an adult.
    Rico also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The
    record reflects that there was no procedural error and that, in light of the totality of
    the circumstances, the sentence within the Guidelines range is substantively
    reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 
    520 F.3d 984
    , 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en
    banc).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    06-50700
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-50700

Citation Numbers: 398 F. App'x 245

Judges: Callahan, Silverman, Smith

Filed Date: 10/4/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023