
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rafael MOLINA-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10092.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 21, 2012.
    
    Filed Feb. 22, 2012.
    Dillon Fishman, Esquire, USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Mark Willimann, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. Appellant P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Rafael Molina-Martinez appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Molina-Martinez contends that the district court erred when it applied a 16-level enhancement, under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, because his prior conviction for lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age, in violation of Cal.Penal Code § 288(a), does not qualify as a crime of violence. He contends that United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144, 1147 (9th Cir.1999), holding that a violation of CaLPenal Code § 288(a) is categorically a crime of violence, is inconsistent with Johnson v. United States, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1265, 176 L.Ed.2d 1 (2010). This contention lacks merit. See United States v. Orozco-Acosta, 607 F.3d 1156, 1166 (9th Cir.2010) (citing United States v. Medina-Villa, 567 F.3d 507 (9th Cir.2009)). Accordingly, we decline Molina-Martinez’s invitation that we seek en banc review of this issue.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     