FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 11 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-30200
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 6:93-cr-60022-HO-3
v.
MEMORANDUM *
SANTIAGO CASTILLO-ARVIZU,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Michael R. Hogan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2011 **
Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Santiago Castillo-Arvizu appeals from the 36-month sentence imposed upon
revocation of supervised release. 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 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).
Castillo-Arvizu contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable
because he had already been sentenced to a term of 70 months for conduct that
triggered the revocation of his supervised release. However, the within-Guideline
sentence was not unreasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93
(9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). The district court had discretion to impose a consecutive
term for the revocation of supervised release to any sentence of imprisonment. See
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) (policy statement); see also United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d
1058, 1063 (9th Cir. 2007) (where defendant violates supervised release by
committing same offense for which he was placed on supervised release, “greater
sanctions may be required to deter future criminal activity”).
AFFIRMED.
2 10-30200