Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-29
Citations: 324 F. App'x 671
Docket Number: No. 08-10356
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GRABER, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 324
Pages: 671–672

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10356.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 13, 2009.
Filed April 29, 2009.
Daniel R. Schiess, Esquire, USLV-Of-fice of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jason F. Carr, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: GRABER, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Richard Gutierrez appeals from the 18-month sentence imposed following revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Gutierrez contends that the district court erred by failing to provide specific reasons for the sentence imposed and because it is impossible to determine whether the district court relied on impermissible factors in fashioning the sentence. We conclude that the district court gave specific reasons for its sentence and properly considered the permissible sentencing factors from 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 995 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc); see also United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-64 (9th Cir .2007).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.