United States of America v. Jeffrey Louis Kinney

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JEFFREY LOUIS KINNEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-30197
D.C. No. 2:97-cr-00115-RHW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Robert H. Whaley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jeffrey Louis Kinney appeals from the 16-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
FILED
FEB 15 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-30197 2
Kinney contends that the district court committed procedural error by basing
the sentence on clearly erroneous facts. The record reflects that the district court’s
view of the evidence was “plausible in light of the record viewed in its entirety.”
United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269, 1284 (9th Cir. 2006).
Kinney also contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable
because, among other things, he had served sufficient time on the underlying
charge. In light of the totality of the circumstances, the district court’s sentence is
substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.
2008) (en banc).
Kinney’s motion to enlarge the record on appeal is denied. See Fed. R. App.
P. 10(e); Lowry v. Barnhart, 329 F.3d 1019, 1025-26 (9th Cir. 2003).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --