United States v. Dion Patterson

MEMORANDUM

Dion Ivan Patterson appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Patterson contends that he was denied the right of allocution. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.1(b)(2)(E). The record belies this contention. Patterson had an opportunity to make a statement both before and after the court announced its tentative sentence. See United States v. Laverne, 963 F.2d 235, 237-38 (9th Cir.1992) (right of allocution satisfied where defendant permitted to speak before the end of the sentencing hearing but after the court indicated its views regarding the appropriate sentence).

Patterson also contends that the district court procedurally erred by (1) failing to address his mitigating arguments, (2) focusing exclusively on the need to protect the public, (3) relying on clearly erroneous facts, and (4) basing his sentence on the seriousness of his new criminal conduct. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and find none. The record reflects that the court adequately considered Patterson’s…