Case ID: f-appx_300/html/0589-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose CARRERA-IBARRA, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 07-10477.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Nov. 13, 2008.
    
    Filed Nov. 21, 2008.
    Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Carrera-Ibarra appeals from the 90-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Carrera-Ibarra contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to consider his individual circumstances and characteristics, failed to address his request for a departure or his mitigation arguments, and failed to sufficiently explain the basis for his sentence.

The record reflects, however, that the district court listened to Carrera-Ibarra’s departure and mitigation arguments, and conducted a thorough and individualized sentencing analysis before imposing a within-Guidelines range sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 2491, 171 L.Ed.2d 780 (2008). The district court did not proeedurally err, and the sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 586, 596-97,169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.