United States v. John Little Dog, III

MEMORANDUM

John Little Dog’s supervised release was revoked after he violated one of his special conditions of release by possessing pornographic materials. He appeals his twelve-month revocation sentence as unreasonably lengthy. “[A] district court, when revoking supervised release, has discretion to go outside the suggested sentencing range of the policy statements up to the statutory maximum listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e)(3).” United States v. Musa, 220 F.3d 1096, 1101 (9th Cir.2000). Sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release are reviewed for reasonableness, United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir.2007), under an abuse of discretion standard, United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc), even where, as here, the defendant did not object at sentencing. United States v. Autery, 555 F.3d 864, 871 (9th Cir.2009).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing a sentence above the three-to-nine-month range recommended by Chapter 7 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. The court was within its discretion to conclude that Little Dog’s repeated violations of his supervised release condition and his persistence even…