Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Aaron Daniel BURSHIA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-10-06
Citations: 333 F. App'x 316
Docket Number: No. 09-30002
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Aaron Daniel BURSHIA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SILVERMAN, RAWLINSON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 333
Pages: 316–316

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Aaron Daniel BURSHIA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-30002.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 14, 2009.
Filed Oct. 6, 2009.
Carl E. Rostad, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
E. June Lord, Esquire, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before SILVERMAN, RAWLINSON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant’s request for oral argument is denied.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Aaron Daniel Burshia appeals from the 15-month sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Burshia contends that the district court erred by failing to provide an adequate explanation for the sentence and that hxs sentence is unreasonable in light of his background and need for treatment. The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err and that the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Leonard, 483 F.3d 635, 637 (9th Cir.2007); see also United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir.2007).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.