United States v. Albus
This text of United States v. Albus (United States v. Albus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 1 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-5931 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 9:24-cr-00018-DWM-1 v. MEMORANDUM* GERRY ALEN ALBUS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 22, 2025**
Before: GRABER, H.A. THOMAS, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.
Gerry Alen Albus appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for theft of
government money in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641.1 We have jurisdiction under
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 1 Albus does not challenge his conviction or sentence for Social Security fraud through concealment. 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Albus contends the 36-month sentence is unreasonable because it is three
times longer than the sentence he received for the Social Security fraud offense. In
his view, the 12-month sentence imposed for the fraud offense adequately captured
the deception and harm caused by both offenses. The district court did not abuse
its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Albus’s theft of
government funds intended for his mother was largely separate conduct from his
own fraudulent reports to the Social Security Administration. The 36-month
sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and
the totality of the circumstances, including Albus’s extensive history of fraud and
theft and the need for general and specific deterrence. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51;
United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The
weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the
district court.”).
AFFIRMED.
2 24-5931
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Albus, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-albus-ca9-2025.