United States v. Simtob
This text of 313 F. App'x 6 (United States v. Simtob) 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
The district court’s 36-month revocation sentence was reasonable. The district court made clear that it was not placing any special emphasis on the seriousness of Simtob’s criminal conduct. See United States v. Simtob, 485. F.3d 1058, 1063-64 (9th Cir.2007). Instead, the district court relied primarily on Simtob’s “continued pattern of unlawful behavior,” a permissible consideration under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). Id. at 1063. Given Simtob’s extensive criminal history and the likelihood of recidivism, we cannot say that the sentence was unreasonable. See generally Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).
Because the government properly raised its objection to Simtob’s failure to file a timely notice of appeal, we are required to dismiss the portion of Simtob’s appeal challenging his 2005 conviction and sentence. See United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937-40 (9th Cir.2007).
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
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
313 F. App'x 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-simtob-ca9-2008.