FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 27 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-10259
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:12-cr-01996-RCC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MIGUEL ANGEL IBARRA-SERVIN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 18, 2014**
Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Miguel Angel Ibarra-Servin appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ibarra-Servin contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
explain adequately the sentence and by failing to discuss the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
sentencing factors. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-
Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The district court
adequately explained the sentence, stating that a downward variance was warranted
in light of Ibarra-Servin’s medical condition and his efforts to improve his life. See
United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Moreover, the
record reflects that the district court considered the section 3553(a) sentencing
factors. See id. (“The district court need not tick off each of the § 3553(a) factors
to show that it has considered them.”). To the extent that Ibarra-Servin argues that
the district court erred in declining to grant a duress departure, we do not review
that claim except as part of our review of the substantive reasonableness of the
sentence. See United States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1004-08 (9th Cir.
2012), cert. denied, 134 S.Ct. 76 (2013).
Ibarra-Servin also contends the sentence is substantively unreasonable
because the district court failed sufficiently to account for his duress argument and
gave undue weight to his prior conviction for conspiracy to transport and harbor
illegal aliens. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Ibarra-
2 13-10259
Servin’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence
21 months below the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in
light of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances.
See id.
AFFIRMED.
3 13-10259