The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed November 19, 2010.
Kirk Alan Engdall, Assistant U.S., United States Attorney's Office, Eugene, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Bryan E. Lessley, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office, Eugene, OR, for Defendants Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Ann L. Aiken, Chief District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 6:09-cr-60017-AA.
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Joel Beltran-Benitez appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Beltran-Benitez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to adequately explain its reasons for the sentence imposed. He also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err, and the below-Guidelines range sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107, 1117-19 (9th Cir. 2009) (no procedural error where record reflected that judge considered the evidence and arguments presented by the parties); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-95 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).