USA V. JESUS ESCOBOZA-SOTO, No. 18-50265 (9th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FEB 22 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-50265 D.C. No. 3:18-cr-01099-LAB v. JESUS ESCOBOZA-SOTO, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted February 19, 2019** Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Jesus Escoboza-Soto appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 33-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 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). Escoboza-Soto contends that the district court erred by granting only a onelevel fast-track departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1, rather than the four-level departure requested by the parties, and imposing a sentence at the low end of the resulting Guidelines calculation. “In analyzing challenges to a court’s upward and downward departures to a specific offense characteristic or other adjustment under Section 5K, we do not evaluate them for procedural correctness, but rather, as part of a sentence’s substantive reasonableness.” United States v. Ellis, 641 F.3d 411, 421 (9th Cir. 2011). The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Escoboza-Soto’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The 33-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances articulated by the district court, including Escoboza-Soto’s serious criminal history, numerous prior deportations, and failure to be deterred despite receiving a fast-track departure for a previous illegal reentry offense. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. AFFIRMED. 2 18-50265
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.
