Fierro-Torres

MEMORANDUM ***

Jose Juan Fierro-Torres (“Fierro”) appeals his conviction following a guilty plea *387 for distribution of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). He contends that the district court’s failure to advise him of the nature of the charge during the change-of-plea hearing, as required by Fed.R.Crim.P. 11, constitutes reversible plain error. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm Fierro’s conviction.

As the government concedes, the district court committed Rule 11 error by failing to recite the elements of distribution of methamphetamine and to confirm that Fierro understood them. 2 This “is ‘error, and it is plain.’ ” United States v. Covian-Sandoval, 462 F.3d 1090, 1095 (9th Cir.2006) (quoting United States v. Pena, 314 F.3d 1152, 1157 (9th Cir.2003)).

Reversal of Fierro’s conviction, however, is not warranted because he has not shown “a reasonable probability that, but for the error, he would not have entered the plea.” United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 83 , 124 S.Ct. 2333 , 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004). In other words, Fierro-Torres has failed to show the required “causal link” between the Rule 11…