Case ID: f-appx_693/html/0610-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Floyd Dean BEST, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-30030
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 26, 2017
    
    Filed July 6, 2017
    Matthew F. Duggan, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USSP—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Bryan Paul Whitaker, Attorney, Bryan P. Whitaker, Attorney at Law, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision-without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Floyd Dean Best, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the ten-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of a methamphetamine mixture or substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Best contends that the district court im-permissibly imposed the term of supervised release to punish him, We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that the district court did not plainly err. Contrary to Best’s contention, the record reflects that the district court properly based the term of supervised release on Best’s history and characteristics, as well as the need for deterrence, and did not rely on any improper factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c).

Moreover, the ten-year term of supervised release is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the need to deter Best from future criminal conduct. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.