United States of America v. Dean John Perri

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).
NC/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DEAN JOHN PERRI,
Defendant - Appellant.
Nos. 09-30140 & 09-30141
D.C. Nos. 3:08-CR-00529-JAR
3:99-CR-00122-JAR
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
James A. Redden, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Dean John Perri appeals from the consecutive
three-month sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
JAN 11 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NC/Research 09-30140 2
Perri contends that the sentence is unreasonable because the district court
failed to consider all of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), impermissibly relied
upon factors omitted from § 3583(e), and placed undue weight on his criminal
history. The record reflects that the district court did not improperly rely upon
factors omitted under § 3583(e), considered the appropriate sentencing factors, and
that the sentence below the guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See
United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1176, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 2006) (stating that
sentences imposed upon supervised release are reviewed for reasonableness and
discussing the factors a district court may consider upon imposition of such
sentence).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --