United States of America v. Jeffery Marshall

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).
AK/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JEFFERY MARSHALL,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30070
D.C. No. 4:08-CR-00119-SEH
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Jeffery Marshall appeals from the 200-month sentence imposed following
his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute
FILED
JAN 11 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AK/Research 09-30070 2
methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Marshall contends that the within-Guidelines range sentence is substantively
unreasonable because the district court’s application of the career offender
enhancement over-represented the seriousness of his past offenses. The record
reflects that the district court gave thorough consideration to Marshall’s arguments
in support of his request for a sentence below the Guidelines range, but found the
circumstances insufficient to warrant such a sentence. Furthermore, the district
court conducted a reasoned and thorough analysis of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
factors prior to imposing a sentence toward the lower end of the advisory
Guidelines range. Accordingly, the sentence imposed is substantively reasonable.
See United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988, 999-1002 (9th Cir. 2008).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --