United States of America v. Ricardo Amilcar Ramirez- Turcios

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RICARDO AMILCAR RAMIREZ-
TURCIOS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-10348
15-10349
D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00293-JAD
2:09-cr-00103-JAD
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Ricardo Amilcar Ramirez-Turcios appeals the
70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a
deported alien found unlawfully in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
FILED
JUN 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1326(a), and the partially consecutive 24-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
Ramirez-Turcios contends that the district court procedurally erred by (1)
failing to explain adequately its determination to run the revocation sentence
partially consecutive to the sentence imposed for the new criminal conviction, and
(2) imposing the revocation sentence in order to promote respect for the law. We
review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103,
1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The record reflects the district court
considered only the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors, including the need to
provide adequate deterrence, and sufficiently explained the basis for the revocation
sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Ramirez-Turcios also contends that the 78-month aggregate sentence is
substantively unreasonable. 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 relevant sentencing factors and the totality of the
circumstances, including Ramirez-Turcios’s criminal and immigration history. See
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f); Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.
15-10348 & 15-10349 2

-- 2 of 2 --