United States v. Krinitt
This text of 310 F. App'x 131 (United States v. Krinitt) 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
Perry Krinitt appeals from the revocation of his supervised release and the imposition of 58 days of imprisonment and 34 additional months of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Krinitt contends that the .district court committed procedural error by miseharac-terizing the grade level of his revocation offenses and thus miscalculating his Guidelines range. We conclude that any error was harmless. See United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1279, 1280 n. 4 (9th Cir.2006).
Krinitt also contends that the district court erred by failing to provide an adequate explanation for his sentence. We conclude that any error did not affect Krinitt’s substantial rights. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468-69, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007); see also United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761-62 (9th Cir.2008).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
310 F. App'x 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-krinitt-ca9-2009.