UNITED STATES v. ESCOBOZA SOTO (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

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.

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, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (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, 128 S.Ct. 586.

AFFIRMED.