Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Barry Howard LANDRETH, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-01
Citations: 328 F. App'x 440
Docket Number: Nos. 07-50394, 07-50493
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Barry Howard LANDRETH, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 440–440

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Barry Howard LANDRETH, Defendant—Appellant.
Nos. 07-50394, 07-50493.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 16, 2009.
Filed July 1, 2009.
Gregory W. Staples, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Santa Ana, CA, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Elizabeth Newman, FPDCA — Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Barry Howard Landreth appeals from his 72-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Landreth contends that the government breached the plea agreement. We conclude that there was no plain error. See United States v. Cannel, 517 F.3d 1172, 1175-77 (9th Cir.2008); United States v. Allen, 434 F.3d 1166, 1175 (9th Cir.2006); United States v. Maldonado, 215 F.3d 1046, 1051-52 (9th Cir.2000).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.