T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. RI CHARD M I CHAEL GOM EZ , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 09- 10494 D. C . No . 5 : 0 0 - c r - 2 0 3 6 0 - J DF ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia J e r e m yD . F oge l , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r13, 2010 ** B e f o r e : S I L V E R M A N , C A L L A H A N , a n dN .R . S M I T H , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . R i c ha r d M i c ha e l G om e z appe a l s f r om the 21- m onth s e nt e nc e i m pos e d upon the r e voc a t i on of

s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e . W e have j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291, a n dw e a f

f i rm. 

# FI LED OC T 05 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 10494 2 G o m e z c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o c e du r a llye rr e db yf a ilin g to suff i ci ent l y e xp l ai n the se nt ence , and b y r el yi ng on erroneou s f ac t s. T he re cord r e f le c ts th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t p r o c e du r a llye rr . See G al l v. U ni ted States , 5 5 2 U .S . 3 8 , 4 9 - 5 2 ( 2 0 0 7 ) ; s e e a ls o U n ite d S ta tes v . Ca r ty , 5 2 0 F .3 d9 8 4 , 9 9 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ( e n b a n c ) . G o m e z a ls o c o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e db yf a ilin g to re sol ve di sput ed fa ctual i ss ues, i n v i ol at i on of F eder alR ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 32 . T he re cord ref

l ec t s thatthe di stri ctcourtdi d n otre l y upo n any di sput ed in f o rm a tio n w h e n im p o s in g th e s e n te n c e . See U n i ted S ta tes v. Sa etu rn , 504 F . 3d 1 1 7 5 , 1 1 7 8 - 8 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) ( c o n c lu d in g th a t F e d . R . C r im . P . 3 2 ( i) ( 3 ) ( B ) is l i m i t ed t o fac tual di sput es w hi ch af fe ctthe t em po ra l t erm of the se nt ence i m po se d). G o m ez al so co n t en d s th ath i s sen t en ce i s sub st an t i v el y u n reaso n ab l e b ecau se th e d is tr ic t c o u rt r e lie dup o n u n r e liab le a lle g a tio n s o f n e w c r im in a l c o n du c t in a rr iv in g a t th e s e n te n c e , a n db e c au s e th e ab o v e - G u id e lin e s r a n g e s e n te n c e is grea t erthan n ec es saryt o achi eve the go al s of s ent enci ng . T he re cord ref l ec t s that th e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o n s id e r e dth e ap p r o p r ia te s e n te n c in g f a c to r s u n d e r1 8 U .S .C . §§ 35 53 (a ) and 35 83 (e ) , a n dth a t th e s e n te n c e is r e a s o n ab le in lig h t o f th e to ta lity o f th e c ir c u m s tan c e s . Se e U ni te d States v . Si m tob , 4 8 5 F .3 d1 0 5 8 , 1 0 6 2 - 6 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) ; s e e a ls o G a ll 552 U . S . a t51- 52. AF F I RME D.09- 10494 3