United States of America v. Adrian Uriah Broken Rope

* 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ADRIAN URIAH BROKEN ROPE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-30146
D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00074-JDS-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Jack D. Shanstrom, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 7, 2013 **
Portland, Oregon
Before: TASHIMA, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Adrian Broken Rope appeals the sentence for his convictions of involuntary
manslaughter and three counts of assault. We affirm.
FILED
MAR 13 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Broken Rope asserts, for the first time, procedural error at his sentencing, so
that claim is reviewed for plain error. United States v. Rangel, 697 F.3d 795, 800
(9th Cir. 2012). The district court was not required to list every factor under 18
U.S.C. § 3553. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en
banc). The district court delivered a “statement of reasons” as required by 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a). It sufficiently explained its decision to sentence Broken Rope to
sixty months in prison, even though that was above the recommended range under
the federal Sentencing Guidelines. This case did not require more elaborate
explanation. See Carty, 520 F.3d at 995 (noting that a judge’s explanation of
reasons will vary case-by-case). The reasoning behind the sentence was evident.
There was no plain error.
The sentence was not substantively unreasonable. There is no presumption
that an above-Guidelines sentence is unreasonable. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
38, 51 (2007). The district court’s expressed desire to deter similar behavior in the
community, the loss of life, and the severe injuries all support the sentence. It did
not represent an abuse of discretion.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --