Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Cortez JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-08-01
Citations: 535 F. App'x 619
Docket Number: No. 12-30323
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Cortez JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 535
Pages: 619–620

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Cortez JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-30323.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 24, 2013.
Filed Aug. 1, 2013.
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, 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
Anthony Cortez Jackson appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Jackson contends that the district court erred by failing to calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range and explain the sentence. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. The record reflects that the court was aware of the Sentencing Guidelines range and considered the evidence and arguments before imposing the 24-month sentence. Nothing more was required. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358-59, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).
Jackson next argues that the district court erred by including in the judgment the date he was taken into federal custody, which he contends may constrain the Bureau of Prisons' ("BOP") ability to credit him for the time he served in state custody that was not credited towards his state sentence. Contrary to Jackson's claim, the district court's judgment does not limit the BOP's authority to calculate Jackson's sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3585.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.