Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Atlas Valentino LOMELI, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-09-30
Citations: 333 F. App'x 281
Docket Number: No. 08-50300
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Atlas Valentino LOMELI, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, RAWLINSON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 333
Pages: 281–282

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Atlas Valentino LOMELI, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 08-50300.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 14, 2009 .
Filed Sept. 30, 2009.
Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Jerry Chenwei Yang, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Elizabeth Newman, FPDCA — Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, 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).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Atlas Valentino Lomeli appeals from the 36-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Lomeli contends that the district court erred at sentencing by placing special emphasis on the criminal conduct underlying his revocation, and by improperly seeking to punish him for such conduct. The record reflects that the district court sentenced Lomeli pursuant to factors that are appropriate under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir.2007). Accordingly, the district court did not err and the sentence imposed upon revocation is reasonable. See id. at 1061.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.