United States of America v. Oswaldo Ibarra-Meza, a.k.a. Osvaldo Ibarra-Meza

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
OSWALDO IBARRA-MEZA, a.k.a.
Osvaldo Ibarra-Meza,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-10077
D.C. No. 1:12-cr-00220-LJO
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O'Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 14, 2015**
Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Oswaldo Ibarra-Meza appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 121-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction
for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and possession of methamphetamine
* 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).
FILED
OCT 20 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-10077
with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ibarra-Meza contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
consider and address his request for a downward variance to the 120-month
mandatory minimum sentence. We review for plain error, see United States v.
Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The
record reflects that the district court considered Ibarra-Meza’s argument and
granted a downward variance based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. Contrary
to Ibarra-Meza’s contention, the court was not required to explicitly address each
of his arguments. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 359 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --