
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roberto ESCAMILLA-ALVARDO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-30319.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted June 16, 2009.
    
    Filed July 6, 2009.
    Pamela Jackson Byerly, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Tracy Staab, Esquire, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Roberto Escamilla-Alvardo appeals from the 71-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Escamilla-Alvardo contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing by attaching to much weight to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range and failing to consider his arguments for a lower sentence. Escamilla-Alvardo also contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We conclude that the district court did not procedurally err, and that the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

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