Case ID: f-appx_249/html/0652-01.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. Connie Isabelle OSTER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-30502.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 24, 2007.
    
    Filed Oct. 1, 2007.
    Joseph E. Thaggard, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for United States of America.
    James B. Obie, Esq., Obie Law, P.C., Helena, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: CANBY, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Connie Isabelle Oster appeals from the 180-month sentence imposed after her jury-trial conviction for possession and distribution of over 500 grams of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 and 18 U.S.C. § 2. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Appellant contends her sentence is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and because it results in an unwarranted sentence disparity among similarly-situated defendants under § 3553(a)(6). We conclude that appellant’s sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Mix, 457 F.3d 906, 912-13 (9th Cir.2006); see also United States v. Reina-Rodriguez, 468 F.3d 1147, 1158-59 (9th Cir.2006) (holding that sentence disparity is not unreasonable where co-defendant pled guilty and appellant did not).

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