United States v. Bradley Jackson
This text of 401 F. App'x 298 (United States v. Bradley Jackson) 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
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 28 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-30047
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00113-SEH
v. MEMORANDUM * B. V. J.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010 **
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Appellant, a juvenile, appeals from the sentence imposed following his true-
plea to an act of juvenile delinquency, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 5031, that
constituted aiding and abetting burglary, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2(a); 18 U.S.C.
§ 1153(a), (b). Appellant was sentenced to official detention for 14 months and to
* 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). supervision following his release from official detention until his eighteenth
birthday. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The record reflects that the district court conducted the requisite “assessment
of the totality of the unique circumstances and rehabilitative needs” of appellant.
United States v. Juvenile, 347 F.3d 778, 787 (9th Cir. 2003). Appellant has not
shown that the district court abused its discretion by failing to impose the “least
restrictive means to accomplish [appellant’s] rehabilitation.” Id.
AFFIRMED.
2 10-30047
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
401 F. App'x 298, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bradley-jackson-ca9-2010.