USA V. GROSBIN MARTINEZ-GEORGE, No. 14-50429 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 16 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 14-50429 D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00843-LAB v. MEMORANDUM* GROSBIN MARTINEZ-GEORGE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 9, 2015** Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. Grosbin Martinez-George appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a removed 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). Martinez-George argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his alleged cultural assimilation, the disparity that resulted from the district court’s denial of the fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1, the court’s imposition of supervised release, and the fact that he will be subject to deportation after his release from custody. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Martinez-George’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Martinez-George’s criminal and immigration history and the 28-month sentence imposed on his prior conviction for illegal reentry. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. AFFIRMED. 2 14-50429

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.