Case ID: f-appx_401/html/0283-01.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. Keegan C. VAN TUYL, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-30020.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 19, 2010.
    
    Filed Oct. 28, 2010.
    Earl Allan Hicks, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    John H. Loeffler, Esquire, Olson, Loeffler & Landis, P.S., Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Keegan C. Van Tuyl appeals from the sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

Van Tuyl’s sole contention is that the supervised release condition prohibiting association with Neo-Nazi/white supremacist affiliates is unconstitutionally over-broad. The government agrees that the judgment should be changed to explicitly reflect that the condition prohibits association -with known neo-Nazi/white supremacist affiliates. Under these circumstances, we vacate the challenged condition and remand for the district court to re-sentence in a manner consistent with this opinion. See, e.g, United States v. Ross, 476 F.3d 719 (9th Cir.2007). The sentence is affirmed in all other respects.

VACATED in part; AFFIRMED in part; and REMANDED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.