United States v. 2020-04-14 | 19-10280 | USA V. EFRAIN RIVERA-IBARRA | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

EFRAIN RIVERA-IBARRA, AKA Efrain
Rivera,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-10280

D.C. No. 3:18-cr-08359-JJT-1

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
John J. Tuchi, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 7, 2020
**

Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Efrain Rivera-Ibarra appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

*
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).
FILED

APR 14 2020

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

2 19-10280
Rivera-Ibarra contends that the 60-month sentence is substantively
unreasonable. He argues that the district court overemphasized his criminal
history, disregarded the need to avoid sentencing disparities, and was unduly
influenced by a Guidelines range that, in light of the 2016 amendments to U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2, was “inappropriately distorted” for a defendant like Rivera-Ibarra who did
not have “serious” prior offenses. The district court recognized that a within-
Guidelines sentence was not warranted in this case and granted a significant
downward variance of 32 months from the low end of the Guidelines range. This
was not an abuse of discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
District courts have discretion as to how to weigh the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
sentencing factors, see United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th
Cir. 2009), and the below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light
of those factors and the totality of circumstances, including Rivera-Ibarra’s
criminal history and prior immigration conviction. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.