Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victorino SANDOVAL-SEPULVEDA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-01-28
Citations: 265 F. App'x 623
Docket Number: No. 07-30143
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victorino SANDOVAL-SEPULVEDA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 265
Pages: 623–624

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victorino SANDOVAL-SEPULVEDA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-30143.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 14, 2008 .
Filed Jan. 28, 2008.
Joshua A. Van De Wetering, Esq., USMI—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Monte L. Jewell, Esq., Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Victorino Sandoval-Sepulveda appeals from the 6-month sentence imposed following revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for reasonableness, United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1176 & n. 5 (9th Cir.2006), and we affirm.
Sandoval-Sepulveda contends that the district court's application of U.S.S.G § 7B1.3(f) resulted in an unreasonable sentence. We disagree, and conclude that the district court neither abused its discretion in considering the Chapter 7 policy statement, nor imposed an unreasonable sentence.
See Miqbel, 444 F.3d at 1176 & n. 5.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.