United States v. Van Patten
This text of 249 F. App'x 675 (United States v. Van Patten) 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
Lisa Van Patten appeals from the sentence imposed following revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for plain error, United States v. Ortiz, 362 F.3d 1274, 1278 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.
[676]*676Appellant contends that 18 U.S.C. § 3624(e) prohibits the district court from imposing a consecutive sentence of imprisonment where a defendant violates concurrent terms of supervised release. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Jackson, 176 F.3d 1175, 1177-78 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam).
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
249 F. App'x 675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-van-patten-ca9-2007.