The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed November 22, 2010.
Anca Iulia Pop, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Firm Address: SUITE 4800 Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mark Willimann, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 4:09-cr-01172-DCB.
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Anna Veronica Murrieta appeals from the 37-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), (b)(1)(C). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Murrieta contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to consider her individual circumstances and arguments for a lower sentence. The record indicates that the district court considered Murrieta's arguments in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and did not otherwise procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Murrieta also contends that her sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), her sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is reasonable. See Carty, 520 F.3d at 993-94.