
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cristian Alfonso SOTO-MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10547.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 10, 2012.
    
    Filed Sept. 14, 2012.
    Cory Michael Picton, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Jay A. Marble, Assistant Federal Public Defender, M. Edith Cunningham, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Cristian Alfonso Soto-Medina appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation and possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a) and 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Soto-Medina contends that his sentence was substantively unreasonable because the sentence did not account for mitigating factors related to Soto-Medina’s criminal history, his age, his work ethic, the death of his father, and his depression. We conclude that the sentence at the low end of the Guidelines range was not substantively unreasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

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