United States of America v. David Phillips

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
DAVID PHILLIPS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30291
D.C. No. 9:03-cr-00037-DWM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
David Phillips appeals from the 27-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for perjury/false declarations before U.S. Courts, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and
we affirm.
FILED
JUN 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-30291 2
Phillips contends that his 27-month sentence, to run consecutively to his
undischarged federal sentences, is unreasonable because it punishes conduct
already accounted for by his federal sentences for probation revocation and escape.
The record reflects that the district court did not procedurally err and that, in light
of the totality of the circumstances, the within-Guidelines sentence is substantively
reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also United
States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). The district court
properly imposed the consecutive sentences in order to punish each separately and
distinctly offensive act. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1063 (9th Cir.
2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --