United States of America v. William Slattery

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
WILLIAM SLATTERY,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50457
D.C. No. 2:04-cr-00950-DDP
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Dean D. Pregerson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 17, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
William Slattery 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
JUL 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50457 2
Slattery contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
explain adequately its reasons for the revocation sentence. The record belies his
contention.
Slattery next contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In
light of Slattery’s breach of trust and failure to be deterred, and the need to protect
the public, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e);
United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1063 (9th Cir. 2007) (where defendant
violates supervised release by committing same offense for which he was placed
on supervised release, breach of trust is more significant and “greater sanctions
may be required to deter future criminal activity”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --