Brown

MEMORANDUM *

Norman Lee Brown challenges the district court’s imposition of five years of supervised release following his violation of the conditions of an earlier release. Brown argues that the district court failed to consider certain sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553 (a) & 3583(e), and that the five-year term was unreasonable.

‘Whether the district court provided an adequate statement of reasons for the sentence it imposed is a question of law that we review de novo.” United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1176 (9th Cir.2006). “A district court is not required to refer to each factor listed in § 3553(a).” United States v. Mix, 457 F.3d 906, 912 (9th Cir. 2006) (citing United States v. Simpson, 430 F.3d 1177, 1186 (D.C.Cir.2005)). “When a defendant has not asserted the import of a particular § 3553(a) factor, nothing in the statute requires the court to explain sua sponte why it did not find that factor relevant to its discretionary decision.” Simpson, 430 F.3d at 1187 . The sentence ultimately imposed is reviewed for reasonableness in light of the sentencing factors. Miqbel, 444 F.3d at 1176 & n. 5.

The only factor Brown raised at his revocation hearing was…