United States v. Anibal Diaz-Rodriguez

Good Law
592 F. App'x 636
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 24, 201513-50633California350 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Aníbal Diaz-Rodriguez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24-month custodial sentence and 12-month term of supervised release imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Diaz-Rodriguez claims that the court erred by delaying his post-revocation sentencing hearing until after he was sentenced in his new criminal case. Under the circumstances, we conclude that the delay was not unreasonable. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.1(b)(2); United States v. Reyes-Solosa, 761 F.3d 972, 976-77 (9th Cir.2014) (“[A] district court can continue post-revocation sentencing for a reasonable time to consider a supervised releas-ee’s sentence in the underlying criminal proceeding as part of evaluating the supervised releasee’s breach of trust.”). Accordingly, we also reject Diaz-Rodriguez’s contention that the delay violated his right to due process. See Reyes-Solosa, 761 F.3d at 977 n. 4.

Diaz-Rodriguez next contends that the district court procedurally erred by considering an impermissible sentencing factor, namely, the adequacy of the aggregate sentence for the new criminal conviction and the supervised…

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.