Summary
considering large prison sentences as a factor that "weighs heavily in favor of detention"
Summary of this case from United States v. TaylorOpinion
No. 16-50109
04-19-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ERNESTO CASILLAS-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 3:15-cr-02489-MMA MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Michael M. Anello, District Judge, Presiding Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Ernesto Casillas-Perez appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 41-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.
Casillas-Perez contends that the district court procedurally erred by basing his sentence on the erroneous belief that he was on supervised release at the time of the offense. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude there was none. Contrary to Casillas-Perez's contention, the court's mention of his breach of the court's trust does not reflect that the court believed that he was on supervised release. In any event, Casillas-Perez has not shown that any error affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761-62 (9th Cir. 2008).
AFFIRMED.