MEMORANDUM **

Jaime Garcia-Herrera appeals from the 50-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for re-entry of removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Garcia-Herrera contends that the district court proeedurally erred (1) by failing to consider his argument that the sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i) lacks an empirical basis or considered rationale and is not an accurate measure of the gravity of the underlying offense; and (2) by failing to explain why it selected his sentence. We review for plain error, see United States v. Dall-nian, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir. 2008), and affirm because Garcia-Herrera has not established any error by the district court, see id. at 761-62. The record shows that the court heard and considered all of Garcia-Herrera’s arguments and properly explained its rationale for selecting the sentence. See United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez, 567 F.3d 1050, 1053-54 (9th Cir. 2009).

Garcia-Herrera also contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the below-Guidelines sentence was not substantively unreasonable. See Unit *423 ed States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108-09 (9th Cir. 2010).

AFFIRMED.