United States of America v. Narek Papikian

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
NAREK PAPIKIAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50438
D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00449-ODW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Otis D. Wright, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Narek Papikian appeals from the 87-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for possession of 15 or more unauthorized access devices, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(3), and aggravated identity theft, in violation of
FILED
SEP 21 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50438 2
18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we
affirm.
Papikian contends that the district court erred by failing to make factual
findings or to hold an evidentiary hearing on whether he was a victim of
sentencing entrapment. The record reflects that Papikian did not present this claim
to the district court and therefore this claim is forfeited. See United States v. Si,
343 F.3d 1116, 1128 (9th Cir. 2003).
Papikian also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable
because his criminal history is overstated, the district court took into account his
prior arrests, his drug addiction and depression are mitigating factors not properly
accounted for, and the sentence is longer than necessary for someone with his
background. The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of
the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors.
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --