Case ID: f-appx_468/html/0790-01.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. Todd Jeremy RICE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-30249.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 21, 2012.
    
    Filed Feb. 23, 2012.
    Carl E. Rostad, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, Mt, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
    Michael Donahoe, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of Montana, Helena Branch Office, Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Todd Jeremy Rice appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rice contends that the district court abused its discretion when it determined that he violated the terms of his supervised release. Specifically, Rice contends that there was insufficient evidence to show that he violated supervised release by (1) illegally possessing a controlled substance, and (2) failing to report for drug testing. The record reflects that the government proved the violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See United States v. Turner, 312 F.3d 1137, 1142 (9th Cir.2002). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it revoked Rice’s supervised release. See United States v. Daniel, 209 F.3d 1091, 1094 (9th Cir.2000).

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