Case ID: f-appx_540/html/0753-02.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. Richard ALVAREZ-AYALA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-50559.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 24, 2013.
    
    Filed Oct. 2, 2013.
    Assistant United States, Curtis A. Kin, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Michael Tanaka, Deputy Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. 
        See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Richard Alvarez-Ayala appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 12-month and one day sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Alvarez-Ayala contends that the district court erred when it imposed a term of imprisonment for the purpose of rehabilitation. We review for plain error, see United States v. Grant, 664 F.3d 276, 279 (9th Cir.2011), and find none. The record reflects that the district court discussed its hope that Alvarez-Ayala would deal with his underlying substance abuse problems but did not “ ‘impose or lengthen [the custodial] sentence to enable [Alvarez-Ayala] to complete a treatment program or otherwise promote rehabilitation.’” See id. at 281 (quoting Tapia v. United States, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2382, 2392, 180 L.Ed.2d 357 (2011)).

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