FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 27 2014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. 14-10018
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:13-cr-00333-JGZ-
BPV-1
v.
DAVID ANGULO-VISCARRA, a.k.a. MEMORANDUM*
David Angulo-Vizcarra,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 18, 2014**
Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
David Angulo-Viscarra appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 40-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
attempted exportation of goods from the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §
*
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).
554(a) and 22 U.S.C. § 2278(b)(2) and (c). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
Angulo-Viscarra contends that the district court failed to consider his
argument regarding unwarranted sentencing disparities and did not sufficiently
explain the reasons for rejecting that argument. Because Angulo-Viscarra did not
object on these grounds below, we review for plain error. See United States v.
Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir. 2008). Angulo-Viscarra has not shown plain
error affecting his substantial rights. See id.; United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984,
991-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); see also United States v. Carter, 560 F.3d 1107,
1121 (9th Cir. 2009) (recognizing that co-defendants are not similarly situated and
therefore not subjected to unwarranted sentencing disparities where they are
convicted of different offenses).
AFFIRMED.
2