Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leon MUHAMMAD, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-11-21
Citations: 585 F. App'x 662
Docket Number: No. 14-10114
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leon MUHAMMAD, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 662–663

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leon MUHAMMAD, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10114.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 18, 2014.
Filed Nov. 21, 2014.
Amber Marie Craig, Assistant U.S., Bradley William Giles, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Alina Maria Shell, Federal Public Defender’s Office Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, 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
Leon Muhammad appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Muhammad contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the allegedly minor nature of his violations. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Muhammad's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Even accepting Muhammad's characterization of his violations as minor, the 24-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Muhammad's criminal history and breach of the court's trust. See United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir.2006) (at a revocation sentencing, the court may sanction a violator for his breach of the court's trust).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.