United States of America v. Faustino Crespin

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FAUSTINO CRESPIN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30312
D.C. No. 1:08-cr-00119-EJL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 23, 2010**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Faustino Crespin appeals from the 80-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for malicious damage to a building by fire, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 844(f)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
SEP 03 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-30312 2
Crespin contends that the court failed to consider defendant-specific
mitigating factors as part of its 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) analysis, and that the sentence
was greater than necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing. The record reflects
that the district court carefully considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing
factors, including Crespin’s arguments in mitigation, and provided a well-reasoned
and thorough explanation for the sentence imposed. The district court did not
procedurally err, and the sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of
the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also
United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --