United States v. Jose Ayala-Medina
United States v. Jose Ayala-Medina
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jose Raul Ayala-Medina appeals from the district court’s judgment and' challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine and heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ayala-Medina contends that his above-Guidelines sentence is greater than necessary under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in light of his individual circumstances, including his age, lack of criminal history, and motivation for committing the offense. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Ayala-Medina’s sentence. See. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence, three-months above the high end of the Guidelines range, is substantively reasonable in light of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See id.; see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.