NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 3 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-50502
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:05-cr-00200-BEN
v.
MEMORANDUM*
DARCY PASCHALL,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2017**
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Darcy Paschall appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
six-month custodial sentence and 51-month term of supervision 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 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).
Paschall contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
respond to her nonfrivolous argument in favor of leniency. We review for plain
error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.
2010), and conclude that there was none. The record reflects that the district court
considered Paschall’s argument and adequately explained its reasons for imposing
the sentence selected. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358-59 (2007).
Paschall also contends that the 51-month term of supervised release is
substantively unreasonable in light of the district court’s willingness to terminate
supervision in two years if Paschall remains violation-free. The district court did
not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The
term of supervised release is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including
Paschall’s history of drug and alcohol abuse. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-50502