United States of America v. Bernadette Garcia

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BERNADETTE GARCIA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-10074
D.C. No. 4:08-CR-00180-CKJ
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Bernadette Garcia appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following
her guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). We have jurisdiction pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
APR 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-10074 2
Garcia contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
adequately consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, her request to
disregard the career offender guideline, and her arguments in mitigation. The
record reflects that the district court considered the § 3553(a) factors, but found the
circumstances insufficient to justify disregarding the career offender guideline.
Furthermore, the district court acknowledged Garcia’s mitigation arguments by
granting a three-level downward departure and imposing a sentence at the bottom
of the revised range. Thus, the district court did not procedurally err and the
sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. See
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51-52 (2007); see also United States v. Carty,
520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --