United States of America v. MICHAEL McLOONE

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL McLOONE,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-30344
D.C. No. 3:09-cr-00018-RRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Ralph R. Beistline, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 16, 2016**
Before: LEAVY, BERZON and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Michael McLoone appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
NOV 23 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

McLoone contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of
his mental health issues and the district court’s belief that no period of
incarceration would deter him. The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing
McLoone’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The
sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the section 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)
sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including McLoone’s
criminal history and the need to protect the public. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51
(2007). Moreover, the record reflects that the district court sufficiently explained
its reasons for imposing the within-Guidelines sentence. See United States v.
Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
15-30344 2

-- 2 of 2 --