Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Benjamin David BESS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-12-12
Citations: 84 F. App'x 798
Docket Number: No. 03-10243
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Benjamin David BESS, Defendant— Appellant.
Judges: Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and MCKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 84
Pages: 798–798

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Benjamin David BESS, Defendant— Appellant.
No. 03-10243.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
Decided Dec. 12, 2003.
Joan G. Ruffennach, Esq., Ondre Jackson Williams, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Michael S. Reeves, Esq., Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and MCKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Benjamin David Bess appeals the two-year sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release. Bess contends that the district court abused its discretion by imposing a sentence that exceeded the range outlined in the policy statements set forth in Chapter 7 of the Sentencing Guidelines. He argues that the district court had made up its mind before the sentencing proceedings and imposed the sentence without considering either the policy statements or the facts of the case that led up to the violation of supervised release. We disagree. The record indicates that the district court considered both the facts of the case and, as required, the non-binding Chapter 7 policy statements before imposing the statutory maximum sentence. United States v. George, 184 F.3d 1119,1122 (9th Cir.1999) (holding that the district court must consider, but is not bound by, the ranges stated in the Chapter 7 policy statements).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.