United States of America v. Richard Bushyhead

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
RICHARD BUSHYHEAD,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-30043
D.C. No. 1:98-cr-00095-JDS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Jack D. Shanstrom, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Richard Bushyhead appeals from the 10-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
FILED
OCT 04 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-30043 2
Bushyhead contends that the district court procedurally erred at sentencing
by failing (1) to consider the proper factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); and (2) to
adequately explain the sentence. The record reflects that the district court
considered the proper sentencing factors, adequately explained the sentence, and
did not otherwise procedurally err. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984,
992–93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e).
Bushyhead also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In
light of the totality of the circumstances, the sentence within the Guidelines range
is substantively reasonable. See Carty, 520 F.3d at 993.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --