FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8625423
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States v. Ramirez-Campos

No. 8625423 · Decided October 25, 2006
No. 8625423 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
October 25, 2006
Citation
No. 8625423
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Raul Ramirez-Campos appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (deported alien found in the United States). We affirm. This court reviews a district court’s sentencing decisions for reasonableness. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). To determine whether a sentence is reasonable, the Ninth Circuit considers whether the sentencing judge has provided specific reasons for the sentencing decision, “such that the record on appeal demonstrates explicit or implicit consideration of the sentencing factors set forth in § 3553(a).” United States v. Mohamed, 459 F.3d 979, 985 (9th Cir.2006). Ramirez-Campos argues that the district court erred by ignoring most of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors, focusing solely on Ramirez-Campos’ recidivism. The record, however, indicates that the district court did consider each of the sentencing factors and defendant’s particular facts. This court has repeatedly held that a judge can adequately consider the § 3553(a) factors without mentioning each of them by name. United States v. Mix, 457 F.3d 906, 912 (9th Cir.2006); United States v. Knows His Gun, 438 F.3d 913, 918 (9th Cir.2006); United States v. Cervantes-Valenzuela, 931 F.2d 27, 29 (9th Cir.1991). Here, the district judge said five times on the record that he was considering all the § 3553(a) factors. The judge also said he was imposing the sentence to “avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities” between people with similar criminal histories, to “provide just punishment,” and to “provide some type of a deterring impact.” Given that Ramirez- *823 Campos had already been deported twelve different times and had previous criminal convictions related to unlawful entry, these concerns were reasonable. Ramirez-Campos also argues that his criminal history score, Category V, was “overrepresented” because his past history consisted of non-violent immigration offenses. We disagree. In United States v. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, 441 F.3d 767 (9th Cir.2006), this court upheld a 77-month sentence for an illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . 441 F.3d at 773 . As in the present case, the appellant in Rodriguez-Rodriguez had been deported but returned for family reasons. Id. at 769 . The Rodriguez-Rodriguez appellant also had a mostly nonviolent criminal history. Id. at 770 . Since a 77-month sentence in such circumstances was reasonable, a 70-month sentence in Ramirez-Campos’ case is also reasonable. Ramirez-Campos last argues that the sentencing judge committed a Booker error by failing to consider Ramirez-Campos’ “assimilation” into American culture. Ramirez-Campos did not raise the assimilation argument in district court. As a result, the standard of review is plain error. United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1278 (9th Cir.2006). Since nothing indicates Ramirez-Campos is culturally assimilated into America, the district court did not err in failing to consider this factor. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Raul Ramirez-Campos appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to violating 8 U.S.C.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Raul Ramirez-Campos appeals the sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to violating 8 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Ramirez-Campos in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on October 25, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8625423 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →