United States of America v. Monroe James Ezell

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
MONROE JAMES EZELL,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-30061
D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00260-MJP
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Marsha J. Pechman, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 19, 2012**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Monroe James Ezell appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We
FILED
DEC 31 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-30061 2
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ezell contends that the district court erred by lengthening his sentence based
on his need for rehabilitation. Because Ezell failed to raise this objection at
sentencing, we review for plain error. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan,
608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010). The court did not plainly err because the
record reflects that it did not lengthen the sentence based on Ezell’s rehabilitative
needs. See Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382, 2392 (2011) (“A court
commits no error by discussing the opportunities for rehabilitation within prison or
the benefits of specific treatment or training programs.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --