United States of America v. John Aseph

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JOHN ASEPH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10458
D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00363-GMN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
John Aseph appeals from the 51-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for six counts of wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1343. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
APR 19 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10458 2
Aseph contends that the district court abused its discretion by basing his
sentence on an unreliable amount of loss not substantiated by either probation or
the parties. The district court correctly calculated the advisory guidelines range
based on the stipulated amount of loss. Contrary to Aseph’s contention, the district
court did not select a sentence at the high end of the guidelines range based on its
belief that the loss was greater than the stipulated amount. Rather, the court
properly considered the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
sentencing factors in arriving at a substantively reasonable, within-Guidelines
sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --