United States of America v. Dennis Ray Eagle

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
DENNIS RAY EAGLE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-30231
D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00116-SEH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Dennis Ray Eagle appeals from the 180-month sentence imposed following
his guilty-plea conviction for sexual abuse, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153(a)
and 2242(2)(B). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Eagle contends that his sentence, which was above the advisory Sentencing
FILED
OCT 04 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-30231 2
Guidelines range, was substantively unreasonable. Numerous factors, including
Eagle’s violent history, psychological profile, and previous rejection of court-
ordered treatment, supported the district court’s determination that a within-
Guidelines sentence was inadequate to punish Eagle and to protect the public from
his further crimes. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The district court did not abuse its
discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
Eagle also contends that the district court failed to explain its sentence
sufficiently. This contention is belied by the record, which reflects that the district
court explained its decision in detail and “ha[d] a reasoned basis for exercising [its]
own legal decisionmaking authority.” See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356
(2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --