United States of America v. Samuel Gordon Laverdure

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SAMUEL GORDON LAVERDURE,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-30197
D.C. No. 2:15-cr-00032-LRS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2017**
Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Samuel Gordon Laverdure appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 8-month custodial sentence and 16-month supervised release term
imposed following revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
APR 20 2017
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 --

Laverdure contends that his supervised release term is substantively
unreasonable in light of his unwillingness to comply with the terms of supervised
release. He argues that the district court should have imposed a longer custodial
sentence with no supervised release to follow. The district court did not abuse its
discretion in imposing Laverdure’s sentence. See Gall v.United States, 552 U.S.
38, 51 (2007). The custodial sentence and term of supervised release are
substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and
the totality of the circumstances, including the need to protect the public. See Gall,
552 U.S. at 51. Furthermore, contrary to Laverdure’s contention, the record
reflects that the district court considered his argument that no further term of
supervised release should be imposed.
AFFIRMED.
16-30197 2

-- 2 of 2 --