United States v. Mitchell Boothe

503 F. App'x 508
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 31, 2012
Docket12-30213
StatusUnpublished

This text of 503 F. App'x 508 (United States v. Mitchell Boothe) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Mitchell Boothe, 503 F. App'x 508 (9th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mitchell Jerome Boothe appeals from the district court’s order affirming his bench-trial conviction for disorderly conduct, in violation of 41 C.F.R. § 102-74.390. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Boothe contends that the magistrate judge violated his First Amendment rights by requiring, as a condition of his one-year term of unsupervised probation, that he secure the permission of the presiding district judge before entering any United States District Court facility in the District of Montana. As the district court concluded, imposition of the challenged condition was a permissible exercise of the magistrate judge’s discretion. See United States v. Terrigno, 838 F.2d 371, 374 (9th Cir.1988) (sentencing judge has broad discretion to set probation conditions). The condition is reasonably related to both the circumstances of Boothe’s conviction and the goals of deterrence, punishment, and promotion of respect for the law, and it involves only such deprivation of liberty as is reasonably necessary to serve those ob *509 jectives. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a)(1), (2) and 3563(b); Terrigno, 838 F.2d at 374.

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

United States v. Valerie Terrigno
838 F.2d 371 (Ninth Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
503 F. App'x 508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mitchell-boothe-ca9-2012.