United States v. Sittman

372 F. App'x 794
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided March 31, 2010·No. No. 09-10302·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Dennis J. Sittman appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking a previous term of supervised release and imposing a term of imprisonment and a new term of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Sittman contends that the district court proeedurally erred by failing to explain its reasons for imposing another term of supervised release and contends that the new term of supervised release is substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that the district court did not proeedurally err, and the sentence is not substantively unreasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49-51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1181-82 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Sittman, 372 F. App'x 794 (9th Cir. 2010).

372 F. App'x 794 (United States v. Sittman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gall v. United States
552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court, 2007)
United States v. Jawad Miqbel
444 F.3d 1173 (Ninth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Carty
520 F.3d 984 (Ninth Circuit, 2008)