USA v. Guillermo Godinez, No. 10-50332 (9th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 11 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 10-50332 D.C. No. 3:09-cr-01239-JLS v. MEMORANDUM * GUILLERMO GODINEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 5, 2011 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Guillermo Godinez appeals from the 72-month sentence imposed following his 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). Godinez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to explain adequately its sentence and by failing to address nonfrivolous mitigating arguments. The contention is belied by the record. He further contends that his sentence reflects improper double counting of his criminal history. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Garcia-Cardenas, 555 F.3d 1049, 1050 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). Godinez also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable under United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2009), because the sentence does not adequately account for the age of his prior convictions and his individual circumstances. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the sentence is substantively reasonable. See Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d. at 1058. AFFIRMED. 2 10-50332

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.