Case ID: f-appx_315/html/0662-01.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. Juan VILLANUEVA-MACHADO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-50265.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 18, 2009.
    
    Filed March 3, 2009.
    Caroline Han, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Timothy Robert Garrison, Trial, Federal Defenders Of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Juan Villanueva-Machado appeals from the eight-month sentence imposed upon remand following the revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Villanueva-Machado contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court relied upon the impermissible factors of “just punishment” and “seriousness of the offense,” set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A), in formulating the sentence. The record indicates that the district court did not rely solely or primarily on impermissible factors when imposing the revocation sentence and focused instead on the breach of trust. We therefore conclude that the sentence is reasonable. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-64 (9th Cir.2007); see also United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182-83 (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.