United States v. Jaime Fregoso-Rodriguez

MEMORANDUM

Jaime Fregoso-Rodriguez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 12-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. Fregoso-Rodriguez contends that the court procedurally erred at sentencing and imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence. We review unpreserved claims of procedural error for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir.2010), and the substantive reasonableness of a sentence for abuse of discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 , 128 S.Ct. 586 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Fregoso-Rodriguez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to appreciate its discretion under Kim-brough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 , 128 S.Ct. 558 , 169 L.Ed.2d 481 (2007), to deviate from the Sentencing Guidelines based on policy grounds. The district court entertained Fregoso-Rodriguez’s policy-based arguments in favor of a variance and implicitly rejected them. Absent some contrary indication in the record, we assume that district judges understand the law. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th…