United States v. Tucker
This text of 319 F. App'x 518 (United States v. Tucker) 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
Robert Ellee Tucker appeals from the 24-month sentence imposed following the revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Tucker contends that the district court violated Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of [519]*519Criminal Procedure and his right to due process by failing to disclose material information used in determining that a sentence at the statutory maximum was necessary for him to enroll in the Bureau of Prisons residential drug treatment program. No reversible error was committed. See United States v. Warr, 580 F.3d 1152, 1162 (9th Cir.2008); see also United States v. Duran, 37 F.3d 557, 561 n. 3 (9th Cir.1994).
Tucker also contends that the district court violated 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(2) by failing to explain the specific reasons for his sentence above the recommend range under the Chapter 7 policy statements. This contention is belied by the record. See United States v. Musa, 220 F.3d 1096, 1101 (9th Cir.2000); cf. United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1179 (9th Cir.2006).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th 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
319 F. App'x 518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-tucker-ca9-2009.