United States v. Anthony Moore
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Anthony Moore appeals from the district court’s modification of the conditions of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction over Moore’s appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a). We assume that the parties are familiar with the facts of the case so we do not repeat them here. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, United States v. Weber, 451 F.3d 552, 557 (9th Cir.2006), we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by requiring Moore to participate in an outpatient substance abuse treatment program. A drug-treatment condition is appropriate if a defendant may have a “present propensity” for drug abuse. See United States v. Napier, 463 F.3d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.2006). The record indicates that Moore had an extensive history of drug use and that he used drugs, such as cocaine, up until his arrest for bank robbery. After that point, he was confined almost continuously until the beginning of this period of supervised release. The district court did not abuse its discretion by presuming that Moore could have an ongoing propensity for drug abuse, even if there was no specific evidence of drug use while he was confined in prison.