United States v. Van Sickle

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 25, 202524-7870California381 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-7870 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 3:23-cr-10119-RBM-1 v.

MEMORANDUM*

TROY CLINTON VAN SICKLE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Ruth Bermudez Montenegro, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 22, 2025**

Before: GRABER, H.A. THOMAS, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.

Troy Clinton Van Sickle appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the sentence of 14 months’ imprisonment and 22 months’ supervised

release imposed upon the revocation of his supervision. 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). Van Sickle contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.