
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel PEREZ-AGUIRRE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-50355.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 24, 2011.
    
    Filed June 9, 2011.
    Hamilton Arendsen, Bruce R. Castetter, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Robert L. Swain, Esquire, Law Offices of Robert L. Swain, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Joel Perez-Aguirre appeals from the 51-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Perez-Aguirre contends that the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence because it focused too heavily on his criminal history and did not account for his motive in returning to the United States. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), the district court’s sentence within the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).

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