United States v. Barbara Rodriguez

MEMORANDUM

Barbara Rodriguez appeals her sentence upon the revocation of supervised release. She contends that the district court erred by converting her 180-day stay in a residential reentry center (“RRC”) to an equivalent length of imprisonment under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 7B1.3(d), relying on an improper sentencing factor, and imposing a sentence that was substantively unreasonable. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. We need not decide whether the district court’s application of guideline 7B1.3(d) to the facts of this case was correct. Rodriguez did not object, so we will not overturn the district court’s guideline interpretation unless it was plainly erroneous. See United States v. Ayala-Nicanor, 659 F.3d 744, 746-47 (9th Cir.2011).

Rodriguez could not have participated in the STAR program in which she was assigned the 180-day RRC stay without being subject to the supervised release term that was imposed in her original revocation sentence. Therefore, the district court’s conclusion that the RRC term was imposed “in connection with” that sentence was a reasonable interpretation of guideline 7B 1.3(d) as…