United States of America v. Jesus Escoboza-Soto

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JESUS ESCOBOZA-SOTO,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-50265
D.C. No. 3:18-cr-01099-LAB
MEMORANDUM*
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).
FILED
FEB 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-50265
Escoboza-Soto contends that the district court erred by granting only a one-
level 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 of 2 --