UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4148
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MARY CASTO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
District Judge. (CR-94-107)
Submitted: July 20, 2005 Decided: August 10, 2005
Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian J. Kornbrath, Federal Public Defender, Clarksburg, West
Virginia, for Appellant. Thomas E. Johnston, United States
Attorney, Shawn Angus Morgan, Assistant United States Attorney,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mary Casto appeals the district court’s judgment revoking
her supervised release and sentencing her to fourteen months in
prison. On appeal, Casto argues the district court failed to fully
consider her history and characteristics, and it abused its
discretion by denying her motion for modification in lieu of
revocation. We affirm.
We review a district court’s judgment revoking supervised
release and imposing a term of imprisonment for abuse of
discretion. United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 642-43 (4th Cir.
1995). In exercising this discretion, the district court must
consider the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2000). See
18 U.S.C.A. § 3583(e) (West 2000 & Supp. 2004). The district court
abuses its discretion when it fails or refuses to exercise its
discretion or when its exercise of discretion is flawed by an
erroneous legal or factual premise. See James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d
233, 239 (4th Cir. 1993). Our review of the record convinces us
the district court fully considered Casto’s history and
characteristics and did not abuse its discretion.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -