United States of America v. Randall Allen Brown

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
RANDALL ALLEN BROWN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30239
D.C. No. 3:08-cr-00279-ALH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Randall Allen Brown appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction for two counts of bank robbery, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
OCT 28 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-30239 2
Brown contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing by
presuming that the Guidelines range was reasonable and by failing to explain why
it was rejecting his arguments for a lower sentence. Brown further contends that
the sentence imposed is substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that the
district court made an individualized determination based on the facts, adequately
explained the sentence, and did not otherwise procedurally err. See United States
v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93, 995 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Additionally, in
light of the totality of the circumstances, the sentence at the bottom of the
Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See id. at 993-94.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --