Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0566-01.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. Alexander KOSTYUKOV, AKA Klbs, AKA Temp, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-10597
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted September 15, 2017 San Francisco, California
    Filed September 25, 2017
    
      Nancy M. Olson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USLV—Office of the- U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USRE— Office of the US Attorney-Reno, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Mario D. Valencia, Esquire, Attorney, Mario D. Valencia, Attorney At Law, Henderson, NV, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: SOHROEDER and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and WHALEY, District Judge.
    
      
      The Honorable Robert H. Whaley, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Washington, sitting by designation,
    
   MEMORANDUM

Kostyukov challenges four enhancements applied at his sentencing hearing for the first time on appeal. When a party fails to raise an objection at trial “yet asserts error on appeal,” we review for plain error. United States v. Santiago, 466 F.3d 801, 803 (9th Cir. 2006). Plain error is “(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights.” United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625, 631, 122 S.Ct. 1781, 152 L.Ed.2d 860 (2002) (quoting Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 466-67, 117 S.Ct. 1544, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997)). That standard is not met here.

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