20-30101•United States of America v. Scott Falk
20-30101Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit29 de jan. de 2021
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SCOTT FALK,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 20-30101
D.C. No.
3:19-cr-00101-TMB-MMS-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 20, 2021**
Before: McKEOWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
Scott Falk appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking supervised
release and challenges the 18-month sentence and 18-month term of supervised
release imposed upon revocation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
* 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).
FILED
JAN 29 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 20-30101
Falk contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the
district court did not give sufficient weight to his amenability to drug treatment and
relied too heavily on the probation officer’s characterization of his performance on
supervised release. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in
light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the
circumstances, including the district court’s determination that Falk posed a danger
to the public. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; see also United States v. Gutierrez-
Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various
factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”). Moreover,
contrary to Falk’s contention, the record reflects that the district court thoroughly
explained its reasons for the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984,
992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.