Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Allen MULLENBERG, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-06
Citations: 391 F. App'x 663
Docket Number: Nos. 09-30320, 09-30321
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Allen MULLENBERG, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: HUG, SKOPIL and BEEZER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 391
Pages: 663–663

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Allen MULLENBERG, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 09-30320, 09-30321.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 7, 2010.
Filed Aug. 6, 2010.
Lori Anne Harper Suek, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
David Merchant, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of Montana, Billings, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: HUG, SKOPIL and BEEZER, 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
Defendant-appellant Ronald Allen Mul-lenberg ("Mullenberg") appeals from a final judgment convicting him of two counts of abusive sexual contact, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1152, 2244(a)(1) & (C). Mullen-berg pleaded guilty to the crimes without a plea agreement, and the district court sentenced him to 121 months imprisonment. We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. The facts of this case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them.
We review "all sentencing decisions" for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).
The determination of whether a sentence is substantively reasonable is "guided by the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including the sentencing range established by the Sentencing Guidelines." United States v. Plouffe, 445 F.3d 1126, 1131 (9th Cir.2006).
Here, contrary to Mullenberg's assertions, the record indicates that the district court engaged in a "thorough and thoughtful consideration of the § 3553 factors" and properly exercised its discretion by imposing a sentence within the applicable guidelines sentencing range. United States v. Cabaccang, 481 F.3d 1176, 1188 (9th Cir.2007).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.