NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 3 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10149
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:03-cr-00358-JAD
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JACK SEIBERT,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 27, 2018**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Jack Seibert appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
21-month custodial sentence and 12-month supervised release term 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).
Seibert contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the
government’s delay in prosecuting him foreclosed the possibility that he serve his
revocation sentence concurrently with the sentence imposed for the state court
conviction giving rise to the violation, and because the Bureau of Prisons is unable
to meet his medical and neurological needs while he is in custody. He additionally
contends that the supervision term is substantively unreasonable because he will
serve one year of state parole upon 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 Seibert’s criminal history and his
failure to be deterred by prior sentences. See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) & cmt. n.4; Gall,
552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.
2 18-10149