USA V. APOLINAR GUTIERREZ-HERNANDEZ, No. 18-50108 (9th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED MAR 19 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS Nos. 18-50108 18-50109 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 3:15-cr-00128-LAB 3:13-cr-02582-LAB v. APOLINAR GUTIERREZ-HERNANDEZ, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted March 12, 2019** Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. In these consolidated appeals, Apolinar Gutierrez-Hernandez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the consecutive 18-month and 11month sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release. 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Gutierrez-Hernandez contends that the district court procedurally erred by sentencing him based on the need to punish and to promote respect for the law, prohibited considerations in a revocation proceeding. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 2006). Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Hammons, 558 F.3d 1100, 1103 (9th Cir. 2009), we conclude that the district court did not err. The record demonstrates that the district court did not impose sentence solely or primarily based on improper factors. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1063 (9th Cir. 2007). Gutierrez-Hernandez also contends that the aggregate 29-month sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to sanction his breach of trust. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Gutierrez-Hernandez’s numerous prior reentries into the United States and the failure of prior, shorter sentences to deter him. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. AFFIRMED. 2 18-50108 & 18-50109
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.
