UNITED STATES v. SAAVEDRA BUSTAMANTE (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Carlos Saavedra-Bustamante appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 15-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for 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.

Saavedra-Bustamante contends that the district court procedurally erred by considering impermissible factors, and by failing to give adequate reasons for denying his request for a fast-track departure. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that there is none. The district court properly considered information about Saavedra-Busamante's criminal history, including his prior lenient sentences and prior arrests, all of which was contained in the uncontested Presentence Report, and was explicitly adopted by Saavedra-Bustamante in his sentencing papers. See United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc) (A district court “may rely on undisputed statements in the PSR at sentencing.”). Moreover, the court's reasons for denying the fast-track departure are apparent from the record, see United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc), and the court adequately explained its reasons for the within-Guidelines sentence, see id.

To the extent Saavedra-Bustamante contends that the government was required to offer him a fast-track plea agreement because he pled guilty quickly, or to explain why it did not offer him such a plea agreement, he provides no support for his argument.

AFFIRMED.