USA V. MIRIAM AVILES-BRITO, No. 15-10113 (9th Cir. 2015)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 23 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS Nos. 15-10113 15-10129 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. Nos. 4:14-cr-01049-JGZ 4:12-cr-01611-JGZ v. MIRIAM AVILES-BRITO, a.k.a. Mariam Aviles De Reyes, a.k.a. Miriam Aviles de Reyes, MEMORANDUM* Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2015** Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. In these consolidated appeals, Miriam Aviles-Brito appeals the 37-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the consecutive four-month sentence * 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). imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Aviles-Brito contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to address her arguments for (1) a downward variance based on the nature and circumstances of the offense, and (2) a downward departure for cultural assimilation. 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 district court considered Aviles-Brito’s arguments and granted a two-level downward variance based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Contrary to Aviles-Brito’s contention, the court was not required to explicitly address each of her arguments. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358-59 (2007). Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the aggregate below-Guidelines sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). AFFIRMED. 2 15-10113 & 15-10129

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.