USA V. JOSE HIDALGO-VILLANUEVA, No. 15-50109 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 14 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 15-50109 D.C. No. 3:14-cr-03410-BEN MEMORANDUM* JOSE LUIS HIDALGO-VILLANUEVA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 9, 2015** Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. Jose Luis Hidalgo-Villanueva appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 13-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). Hidalgo-Villanueva contends that the government breached the parties’ plea agreement at the sentencing hearing by implicitly suggesting that it did not support the stipulated four-level fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1. We reject this argument because the record reflects that, in its sentencing summary chart and at the sentencing hearing, the government stood by its recommendation that Hidalgo-Villanueva receive the stipulated fast-track departure. Accordingly, Hidalgo-Villanueva received the benefit of his bargain and “the presentation of a united front to the court.” United States v. Alcala-Sanchez, 666 F.3d 571, 575 (9th Cir. 2012) (internal quotations omitted). Hidalgo-Villanueva next contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the mitigating factors and the court’s denial of the fast-track departure. We disagree. The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Hidalgo-Villanueva’s immigration history. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). AFFIRMED. 2 15-50109
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.
