Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry A. PANIAGUA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-26
Citations: 372 F. App'x 712
Docket Number: No. 09-30165
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry A. PANIAGUA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 372
Pages: 712–713

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Henry A. PANIAGUA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-30165.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 16, 2010.
Filed March 26, 2010.
Kimberly R. Sayers-Fay, Assistant U.S., Stephan Alexander Collins, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Jo Ann Farrington, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Hugh William Fleischer, Law Offices of Hugh W. Fleischer, Anchorage, AK, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, 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
Henry A. Paniagua appeals from the 18-month sentence imposed following revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Paniagua contends that his sentence im-permissibly increases the sentence imposed for the underlying offense and that it violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The district court imposed the bottom-of-the-Guidelines 18-month sentence to run consecutive to the sentence imposed for the drug conspiracy conviction underlying the supervised release violation.
The record reflects that the district court imposed the 18-month sentence for the legitimate purpose of punishing Pan-iagua for breaching the court's trust by violating the conditions of his supervised release. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir.2007). Moreover, Paniagua failed to demonstrate that his consecutive sentence is grossly disproportionate to his violation of mandatory terms of supervised release. See United States v. Meiners, 485 F.3d 1211, 1213 (9th Cir.2007) (per curiam); see also Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 72, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.