Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo AYON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-09-02
Citations: 394 F. App'x 402
Docket Number: No. 10-50021
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo AYON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 394
Pages: 402–403

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo AYON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-50021.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 23, 2010.
Filed Sept. 2, 2010.
Anne Kristina Perry, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Sarah Marie Gorman, Trial, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, 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
Eduardo Ayon appeals from the 12-month sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ayon contends that the district court failed to adequately explain its sentence. The district court's explanation was sufficient and met the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § '3553(c)(2). See United States v. Musa, 220 F.3d 1096, 1101 (9th Cir.2000).
Ayon also contends that the imposition of supervised release violates Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). This argument is foreclosed by United States v. Santana, 526 F.3d 1257, 1262 (9th Cir.2008).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.