
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ismael ROBLES-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-30330.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 30, 2013.
    
    Filed Sept. 10, 2013.
    Johnathan S. Haub, Assistant U.S., Kelly A. Zusman, Assistant U.S., Office of The U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Ismael Robles-Perez, Sheridan, OR, pro se.
    Before: HUG, CANBY, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ismael Robles-Perez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 48-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.

Robles-Perez contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his psychological condition. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Robles-Perez’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The 48-month sentence, well below the uncontested Guidelines range of 77 to 96 months, is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Robles-Lopez’s extensive criminal history and five prior deportations. See id.

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