FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 19 2010
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, Nos. 09-50183
09-50247
Plaintiff–Appellee,
D.C. Nos. 2:06-cr-00619-RHW-1
v. 2:06-cr-00297-RHW-1
CHRISTOPHER JORDAN,
MEMORANDUM *
Defendant–Appellant.
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Judge Robert H. Whaley, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 14, 2010 **
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Christopher Jordan appeals an order of the district court revoking his term of
supervised release. Jordan contends that the district court abused its discretion and
committed reversible errors of law and fact in finding that he had violated seven
conditions of his supervision.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral
argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s decision to revoke a
term of supervised release. United States v. Verduzco, 330 F.3d 1182, 1184
(9th Cir. 2003). Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), a district court may “revoke a term
of supervised release . . . if the court . . . finds by a preponderance of the evidence
that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release.” 18 U.S.C.
§ 3583(e)(3). Therefore, revocation of a term of supervised release can be “based
upon only one violation.” United States v. Daniel, 209 F.3d 1091, 1094 (9th Cir.
2000).
At his revocation hearing in the district court, Jordan admitted that he had
violated two conditions of his supervision: namely, operating a motor vehicle with
a suspended or revoked driver’s license and failing to make restitution payments.
Because Jordan admitted to two violations, the district court did not abuse its
discretion in revoking Jordan’s term of supervised release. See, e.g., United States
v. Jeremiah, 493 F.3d 1042, 1045 (9th Cir. 2007) (upholding the revocation of
appellant’s term of supervised release on the sole basis that appellant had “missed
making at least some full restitution payments”). We therefore need not address
Jordan’s challenges to several other violations found by the district court.
The order of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
2