MEMORANDUM **

Roberto Hernandez Guzman appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to a single count of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, illegal reentry. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Because the arguments Guzman now raises on appeal were not first raised in district court, we review for plain error. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(b); United States v. Ellsworth, 456 F.3d 1146, 1152 (9th Cir. 2006).

We conclude that the district court committed no error at all. In calculating separately Guzman’s sentence for a probation violation and Guzman’s sentence for a new offense, the district court properly followed controlling authority. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2, cmt. n. 11; United States v. Palmer, 946 F.2d 97, 99 (9th Cir. 1991). The district court did not err in awarding Guzman separate criminal history points for sentences imposed on different days. U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(a)(2); see also United States v. Gonzalez, 739 F.3d 420, 421-23, 2013 WL 4792952, at *1 (9th Cir. 2013).

Guzman’s contention that the district court erred in finding that he committed the instant offense while under a criminal justice sentence is unsupported by the record.

AFFIRMED.