United States of America v. Brian Vince Botzon

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
BRIAN VINCE BOTZON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-30351
D.C. No. 2:00-cr-00216-RHW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Robert H. Whaley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 14, 2013**
Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Brian Vince Botzon appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 14-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Botzon contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district
FILED
AUG 16 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-30351 2
court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Botzon’s sentence. See Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in
light of Botzon’s criminal history, his breach of the court’s trust, and the need to
protect the public. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d
1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir. 2007).
To the extent that Botzon contends that the district court placed improper
weight on his original armed bank robbery offense, the record reflects that the
court properly considered that offense as part of his criminal history, and did not
impermissibly punish Botzon for the conduct related to his revocation offenses.
See Simtob, 485 F.3d at 1062-63.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --