UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector CASIMIRO, Defendant-Appellant, 540 F. App'x 752

MEMORANDUM Hector Casimiro appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Casimiro contends that the district court procedurally erred and violated his right to due process by relying on his refusal to waive his appellate rights as a factor in sentencing. The record does not support this contention.

The court explained why Casimiro did not qualify for a fast-track departure, and it did not rely on the lack of an appeal waiver in imposing sentence. Casimiro further contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court should have varied downward to the fast-track Guideline range. The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Casimiro’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v.

Gonzalez-Zotelo, 556 F.3d 736, 740 (9th Cir.2009) (“[F]ast-track disparities are not ‘unwarranted’ so as to permit their consideration under [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a)(6).”). The 70-month sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light of the

section 3553(

a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the nature and circumstances of the offense. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.