Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tomas O. CASABLANCA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-26
Citations: 221 F. App'x 256
Docket Number: No. 06-4863
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tomas O. CASABLANCA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 221
Pages: 256–257

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tomas O. CASABLANCA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-4863.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 31, 2007.
Decided: March 26, 2007.
L. Richard Walker, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. Sharon L. Potter, United States Attorney, Stephen D. Warner, Assistant United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tomas O. Casablanca pled guilty to aiding and abetting the distribution of 1.07 grams of cocaine and was sentenced to four months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. After being released from incarceration, Casablanca began his supervised release in community confinement. After a hearing on the matter, the district court revoked Casablanca's supervised release because he failed to follow the rules of his community confinement center, which was a condition of his supervised release. The court sentenced Casablanca to ten months of incarceration to be followed by twenty-six months of supervised release. Casablanca appeals, arguing that the district court erred by revoking his supervised release. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
We find no abuse of discretion in the district court's decision to revoke Casablanca's supervised release. United States v. Copley, 978 F.2d 829, 831 (4th Cir.1992) (stating review standard). The record reveals that Casablanca had adequate notice that a condition of his supervised release was to abide by the community confinement center's rules and that he violated those rules, resulting in a violation of his supervised release. Accordingly, this claim fails.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.