United States v. Stevens
This text of 465 F. App'x 608 (United States v. Stevens) 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
In these consolidated appeals, Truman Harlow Stevens, Jr., appeals from the consecutive 24-month and 36-month sentences imposed upon revocation of two concurrent terms of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Stevens contends that his sentences are substantively unreasonable because the district court placed undue emphasis on the need to punish him for the seriousness of his underlying convictions and violations at the expense of other more salient factors. The record reflects that the district court considered and properly applied the relevant factors before imposing sentences that are not unreasonable under the totality of the circumstances and in light of the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a) and 3583(e). See United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006).
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
465 F. App'x 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-stevens-ca9-2012.