Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald James KONSHUK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-22
Citations: 389 F. App'x 618
Docket Number: No. 09-30393
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald James KONSHUK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 389
Pages: 618–618

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald James KONSHUK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-30393.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 29, 2010.
Filed July 22, 2010.
Tara Elliott, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Robert Henry Branom, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of Montana, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, 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
Donald James Konshuk appeals from the 175-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Konshuk contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing by failing to provide individualized reasons for imposing the sentence or address the non-frivolous arguments in support of a lower sentence. He further contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err, and that, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991— 93 (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.