Uspc

White v. United States Parole Commission

Good Law
370 F. App'x 873
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 15, 201009-72269California405 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Erica White challenges a sentence imposed by the United States Parole Commission (“USPC”) that she serve a two year term of supervised release, as a result of her conviction in Japan for illegally importing marijuana into the country. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.

The panel first reviews a sentencing order for “significant procedural error,” then it reviews “the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.” United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). “It would be procedural error for [the USPC] to fail to calculate — or to calculate incorrectly — the Guidelines range; ... to fail to consider the § 3553(a) factors; ... or to fail adequately to explain the sentence selected....” Id. The panel looks at the “totality of the circumstances” to determine whether a sentence is substantively unreasonable. Id. The standard of review for substantive reasonableness is abuse of discretion. Id.

The USPC did not commit significant procedural error. The USPC properly determined the guideline range for White’s term of supervised release to be two to three years. See…

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.