Court Opinion

ID: 9910870
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-18 19:00:59.80373+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:54:55.420496
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       DEC 18 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 23-462
                                                D.C. No.1:15-cr-00051-BLW-2
             Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.                                             MEMORANDUM*

MARCUS EMILIO VILLARREAL,

             Defendant - Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Idaho
                   B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted December 12, 2023**

Before:      WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

      Marcus Emilio Villarreal appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon the third revocation of his

supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      Villarreal contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
the district court failed to adequately account for his progress on supervision and

his mitigating factors. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v.

United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The above-Guidelines, statutory maximum

sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) factors and

the totality of the circumstances, including Villarreal’s repeated breaches of the

court’s trust. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51 (stating totality of the circumstances

standard); United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding

that a revocation sentence may be imposed as a sanction for the defendant’s breach

of the court’s trust); see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904,

908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case

is for the discretion of the district court.”).

       AFFIRMED.

                                            2                                    23-462