FILED
                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION                                 JAN 24 2017

                                                                         MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                           U.S. COURT OF APPEALS



                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 15-50478

              Plaintiff-Appellee,                D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00050-SVW

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
LORENZO GONZALEZ, a.k.a. Grumpy,

              Defendant-Appellant.


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Central District of California
                    Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted January 18, 2017**

Before:      TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

      Lorenzo Gonzalez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

the 262-month sentence imposed upon resentencing after remand following his

jury-trial conviction for one count of racketeering influenced and corrupt

organizations conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), and two counts of

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
violent crime in aid of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(2). We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      Gonzalez contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district

court declined to impose the below-guidelines sentence recommended by the

probation officer. The record reflects that the district court adequately explained

its reasons for not accepting the probation officer’s recommendation. See United

States v. Carty, 

, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). The district court did

not abuse its discretion in imposing Gonzalez’s sentence. See Gall v. United

States, 

, 51 (2007). The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively

reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of

the circumstances, including the seriousness of Gonzalez’s offenses and the need

for deterrence. See 

.

      AFFIRMED.




                                            2                                  15-50478