Case ID: f-appx_107/html/0108-01.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. Kiet Dinh NGO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-30017.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 9, 2004.
      
    
    Decided Aug. 18, 2004.
    Mark N. Bartlett, Esq., Ronald J. Friedman, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Mark David Mestel, Mestel & Muenster, Everett, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Kiet Dinh Ngo appeals the sentence imposed upon revocation of his five-year term of supervised release, arising from his guilty-plea conviction for bank fraud. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and we affirm.

Ngo contends that the district court erred by failing to state on the record its reasons for including a 47-month term of supervised release as part of the sentence imposed. We disagree. The district court was required to state “its general reasons for its imposition of the particular sentence[.]” See United States v. Lockard, 910 F.2d 542, 546 (9th Cir.1990); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c). The district court met this requirement by discussing Ngo’s need for post-release substance abuse treatment and his demonstrated potential for recidivism. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c); United States v. Cervantes-Valenzuela, 931 F.2d 27, 29 (9th Cir.1991) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.