Andrews

MEMORANDUM **

Martin Andrews (“Andrews”) appeals his thirty-two-month sentence for violating the conditions of his supervised release, contending that (1) the sentence was an unreasonable deviation from the five-to-eleven-month range set forth in the United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) § 7B1.4(a) because the district court did not properly consider the factors under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553 , 3583(e); and (2) the district court’s imposition of a penile plethysmograph supervised release condition was improper because the court did not make the necessary findings under United States v. Weber, 451 F.3d 552 (9th Cir. 2006). We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm in part and vacate and remand in part.

In imposing a sentence upon revocation of supervised release, a district court must consider the § 3553 factors specified in 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e). See *676 United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1181-82 (9th Cir.2006). Because the record reflects that the district court properly weighed and considered the required factors, as demonstrated by its discussion of Andrews’s history and characteristics, the need to protect the public from further…