United States v. Plancarte-Vazquez, No. 06-3203 (8th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. District Court's drug-quantity calculations were supported by the record; sentence was not unreasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-3203 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Northern * District of Iowa. Isidro Plancarte-Vazquez, also * known as Isidro Plancarte-Rueda, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. * ___________ Submitted: September 27, 2007 Filed: October 23, 2007 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this appeal following remand for resentencing, Isidro Plancarte-Vazquez challenges the sentence of 168 months in prison that the district court1 imposed upon his guilty plea to conspiring to distribute 15,000 grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) and 846, and to possessing with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Plancarte-Vazquez argues that the district court erred by 1 The Honorable James E. Gritzner, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, sitting by designation in the Northern District of Iowa. attributing 30,000 kilograms of marijuana equivalent to him on the basis of inconsistent and unreliable witness testimony, and that the court should have imposed a lower sentence based on its finding that older family members controlled and directed Plancarte-Vazquez. We conclude that the district court s drug-quantity calculation is supported by the record and is not clearly erroneous. We also conclude that the ultimate sentence was not unreasonable with regard to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The district court methodically considered the statutory factors, and because the sentence was within the advisory guidelines range, it is presumptively reasonable. See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462-65 (2007); United States v. Lincoln, 413 F.3d 716, 717 (8th Cir. 2005). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
