United States of America v. Anthony D. Swanegan, a.k.a. Anthony Swanegan, a.k.a. Anthony Demetri Swanegan,…

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ANTHONY D. SWANEGAN, a.k.a.
Anthony Swanegan, a.k.a. Anthony
Demetri Swanegan, a.k.a. Anthony
Demitus Swanegan,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50124
D.C. No. 3:08-cr-07053-IEG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Irma E. Gonzalez, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 19, 2011**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Anthony D. Swanegan appeals from the 24-month sentence imposed
FILED
DEC 30 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50124 2
following the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Swanegan contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
explicitly calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range, and by improperly relying on
punishment during sentencing. Swanegan has not shown that the district court’s
failure to expressly calculate the Guidelines range affected his substantial rights,
particularly where the probation officer correctly calculated the Guidelines range
and the district court provided sufficient reasons for the sentence. See United
States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 761 (9th Cir. 2008). Further, taken in context, the
district court’s reference to “punishment” properly concerned sanctions for
Swanegan’s supervised release violations, not for the underlying state crimes. See
United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1063 (9th Cir. 2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --