UNITED STATES v. RIVERA IBARRA (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

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.

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, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (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, 128 S.Ct. 586.

AFFIRMED.