*1 Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Miguel Angel Gutierrez-Aguilar appeals the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a *2 removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the 15-month consecutive sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Gutierrez-Aguilar contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to (1) consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, (2) address his nonfrivolous mitigating arguments, and (3) explain the sentence adequately. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan , 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The record reflects that the district court considered the section 3553(a) factors and Gutierrez-Aguilar’s mitigating arguments, and explained the sentence sufficiently. See Rita v. United States , 551 U.S. 338, 357-59 (2007); United States v. Carty , 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Gutierrez-Aguilar also contends that the 61-month aggregate sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The aggregate within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the relevant sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Gutierrez-Aguilar’s criminal and immigration history. See id.
AFFIRMED.
2 15-10506 & 15-10507
[*] 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).