United States of America v. Juan Carlos Vaughan

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JUAN CARLOS VAUGHAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50233
D.C. No. 3:06-cr-00097-BTM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Barry T. Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 6, 2012**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Juan Carlos Vaughan appeals from the 24-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
FILED
MAR 09 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50233 2
Vaughan contends that his statutory maximum sentence is substantively
unreasonable. This is Vaughan’s fifth supervised release revocation, which reflects
a continued breach of the court’s trust. The sentence is not unreasonable in light of
the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e).
See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
In his reply brief, Vaughan raises for the first time the argument that the
district court erred by departing upward from the Guidelines. He forfeited this
argument by failing to raise it in his opening brief, and no exceptions to this rule
apply. See Koerner v. Grigas, 328 F.3d 1039, 1048–49 (9th Cir. 2003).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --