USA v. Alfredo Azamar-Aguirre, No. 10-30161 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED FEB 23 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 10-30161 D.C. No. 1:09-cr-30032-PA v. MEMORANDUM * ALFREDO AZAMAR-AGUIRRE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Owen M. Panner, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 15, 2011 ** Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Alfredo Azamar-Aguirre appeals from the 87-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(viii). 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). Azamar-Aguirre contends that the district court committed procedural error because it failed to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and did not adequately explain the chosen sentence. The district court adequately explained the reasons for the sentence it selected, as it explicitly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and Azamar-Aguirre s mitigation argument. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-92 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Azamar-Aguirre also argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because, under the circumstances of his case, it is greater than necessary to accomplish the purposes of sentencing. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the § 3553(a) factors, the sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also United States v. GutierrezSanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (explaining that weight to be given the § 3553(a) factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court ). AFFIRMED. 2 10-30161
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.
