Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lewis BURSHIA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-30
Citations: 606 F. App'x 386
Docket Number: No. 14-30122
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lewis BURSHIA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: HAWKINS; GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 606
Pages: 386–387

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lewis BURSHIA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-30122.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 22, 2015.
Filed June 30, 2015.
Michael S. Lahr, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Helena, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
Anthony R. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender, Robert Henry Branom, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of Montana, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: HAWKINS; GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Robert Lewis Burshia appeals from the district court judgment and challenges the 144-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for three counts of assault -with a dangerous weapon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1153(a), 113(a)(3), and one count of assault resulting in serious, bodily injury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1153(a), 113(a)(6). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Burshia contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to explain the sentence adequately, including why it imposed a consecutive 24-month sentence on the serious bodily injury count. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencictr-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. The record reflects that the district court considered the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, including Burshia's substance abuse problems, and sufficiently explained the basis for the sentence.
Burshia also contends that his 144-month sentence is substantively unreasonable because his need for rehabilitation outside of prison justifies a shorter sentence. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Overton, 573 F.3d 679, 700 (9th Cir.2009). The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the section 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the seriousness of the offense. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.