USA V. GUADALUPE BELTRAN-ARAIZA, No. 18-50429 (9th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED JAN 14 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 18-50429 D.C. No. 3:18-cr-03160-LAB-1 v. MEMORANDUM* GUADALUPE BELTRAN-ARAIZA, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 8, 2020** Before: CALLAHAN, NGUYEN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Guadalupe Beltran-Araiza appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 48-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, 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). Beltran-Araiza argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his familial obligations, his employment history, the allegedly non-violent nature of his criminal history, and his expectation that he would receive a more substantial fast-track departure. 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. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Beltran-Araiza’s significant criminal and immigration history and his failure to be deterred by prior sentences for illegal reentry. See United States v. Rosales-Gonzales, 801 F.3d 1177, 1184 (9th Cir. 2015). Moreover, Beltran-Araiza has not shown that his sentence creates an unwarranted sentencing disparity with any similarly situated defendant. See United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1121 (9th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED. 2 18-50429
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.
