United States v. Zuniga-Leon

MEMORANDUM ** Jose Israel Zuniga-Leon appeals from the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. We reject Zuniga-Leon’s contention that the district court did not comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(3) (“Rule 32”) when it declined to consider alleged delay in prosecution as a factor at sentencing. We disagree and conclude that the district court complied with Rule 32. See United States v. Ingham, 486 F.3d 1068, 1073-75 (9th Cir.2007). We further conclude that the record is sufficiently developed to allow us to consider and to reject Zuniga-Leon’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Labrada-Bustamante, 428 F.3d 1252, 1260-61 (9th Cir.2005). Zuniga-Leon contends that his counsel was ineffective for failing to request a continuance to obtain more information regarding the alleged delay in prosecution. Because the district court expressly declined to consider the alleged delay as a factor at sentencing, ZunigaLeon cannot show a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different had his counsel requested the continuance. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Labradar-Bustamante, 428 F.3d at 1261 . AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.