MEMORANDUM **

Edgardo Martinez-Martinez appeals from the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Martinez-Martinez contends that the district court procedurally erred by impermissibly considering his rejection of the government’s fast-track plea offer and the sentence that would have resulted therefrom. We review for plain error. See United States v. Evans-Martinez, 611 F.3d 635, 642 (9th Cir. 2010). Martinez-Martinez fails to demonstrate that the district court’s inquiry into whether he rejected a plea offer was plain error that affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761-62 (9th Cir. 2008).

Martinez-Martinez also contends that the sentence imposed is substantively unreasonable due to the age of the prior violent felony conviction that triggered a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A). The district court specifically considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, in conjunction with the staleness of the conviction, prior to granting a downward variance from the advisory Guidelines range. See United States v. Amezcuar-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050, 1054-56 (9th Cir. 2009). The below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586,169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

AFFIRMED.