USA V. MIGUEL MARTINEZ-VILLAREAL, No. 14-10121 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED APR 30 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS Nos. 14-10121 14-10125 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. Nos. 2:07-cr-00277-PGR 4:13-cr-00134-PGR v. MIGUEL MARTINEZ-VILLAREAL, a.k.a. Sergio Ponce De Leon, a.k.a. Miguel Angel Gonzalez, a.k.a. Miguel Gonzalez-Martinez, a.k.a. Miguel Gonzalez-Villareal, a.k.a. Miguel Martinez, a.k.a. Mario Sanchez, MEMORANDUM* Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Paul G. Rosenblatt, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 22, 2015** Before: GOODWIN, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. In these consolidated appeals, Miguel Martinez-Villareal appeals from the district court’s judgments and challenges the 79-month sentence imposed following * 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). his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the 16-month consecutive sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Martinez-Villareal contends that the district court erred by (1) failing to explain adequately the sentences imposed, (2) failing to address his sentencing arguments, and (3) presuming that a Guidelines sentence was reasonable. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia–Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The record reflects that the court considered Martinez-Villareal’s arguments, sufficiently explained the sentences, and properly treated the Guidelines as advisory in granting Martinez-Villareal’s request for a downward variance. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Moreover, the below-Guidelines sentences are substantively reasonable in light of the relevant sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Martinez-Villareal’s criminal history. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). AFFIRMED. 2 14-10121 & 14-10125