United States v. Eric Harris
This text of 693 F. App'x 566 (United States v. Eric Harris) 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
MEMORANDUM **
Eric Michael Harris appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges *567 the 12-month term of supervised release imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Harris contends that he is not amenable to supervised release due to his inability to adhere to mental health treatment and medication, and consequently, the district court abused its discretion by imposing continued supervision as part of his supervised release revocation sentence. The 12-month term of supervised release is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the need to rehabilitate Harris and protect the public. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Harris’s argument that he is unamenable to supervision does not render the sentence substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Hurt, 345 F.3d 1033, 1036 (9th Cir. 2003) (“A violation of the conditions of supervised release does not obviate the need for further supervision, but rather confirms the judgment that supervision was necessary.”).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid *567 ed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
693 F. App'x 566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-eric-harris-ca9-2017.