United States v. Jesus Sandoval-Talavera

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 24 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-10599 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-01333-DCB v. MEMORANDUM * JESUS OCTAVIO SANDOVAL- TALAVERA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 10, 2012 ** Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Jesus Octavio Sandoval-Talavera appeals from the 24-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). Sandoval-Talavera first contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to explain adequately the basis for imposing a consecutive sentence. The record reflects that the court considered the parties’ arguments and adequately explained the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Sandoval-Talavera next contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of Sandoval-Talavera’s lengthy criminal history, failure to be deterred, and breach of trust, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006) (at a revocation sentencing, a district court may sanction the defendant for his breach of trust). AFFIRMED. 2 11-10599