United States of America v. Michael Lizarraga

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
MICHAEL LIZARRAGA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-50212
D.C. No. 3:06-cr-00755-LAB
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Michael Lizarraga appeals from the 18-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
MAR 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NC/Research 09-50212 2
Lizarraga contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
calculate and consider the applicable range under the Sentencing Guidelines. As
Lizarraga concedes, this contention is reviewed for plain error. See United States
v. Knows His Gun, 438 F.3d 913, 918 (9th Cir. 2006). Applying this standard, the
record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err at sentencing. See id.;
see also United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 983, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Lizarraga also contends, to preserve for further review, that the supervised
release revocation procedure under 18 U.S.C. § 3583 violates the Sixth
Amendment. As Lizarraga concedes, this contention is foreclosed by United States
v. Santana, 526 F.3d 1257, 1262 (9th Cir. 2008).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --