MEMORANDUM **

Miguel Navarro-Valle appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 12-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.

Navarro-Valle contends that the district court procedurally 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 government. “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). Contrary to Navarro-Valle’s contention, his within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the need for deterrence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

Navarro-Valle also argues that the district court violated the separation of powers doctrine by considering an internal Department of Justice memorandum in evaluating the fast-track departure. Even if Navarro-Valle is correct that this claim is reviewable, we are not persuaded. Navarro-Valle has not demonstrated that the *702 court’s consideration of the memorandum for “informational” purposes infringed on any prosecutorial power. See United States v. Miller, 722 F.2d 562, 565 (9th Cir. 1988) (“[Separation of powers requires that the judiciary remain independent of executive affairs”).

AFFIRMED.