United States of America v. Gary L. Adams

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
GARY L. ADAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30105
D.C. No. 2:06-CR-00253-EJL
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Gary L. Adams appeals from the six-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NC/Research 09-30105 2
Adams contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of
his mitigating arguments, and that the district court erroneously considered
dismissed battery charges as an aggravating factor at sentencing. Adams’
contention that the district court improperly weighed his dismissed battery charges
lacks merit and is not supported by the record. See United States v. Barragan-
Espinoza, 350 F.3d 978, 983 (9th Cir. 2003). The record reflects that the district
court properly considered the sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), and
that the sentence is reasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); see also United States v.
Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); United States v. Miqbel, 444
F.3d 1173, 1176 (9th Cir. 2006).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --