Goodman

MEMORANDUM **

Tyra Goodman (“Goodman”) appeals her twelve-month sentence for violating the terms of her supervised release. She offers three grounds: first, that the district court failed to state specific reasons for imposing an out-of-guidelines sentence, second, that the twelve-month sentence was unreasonable, and third, that the district court erred in finding that she violated the term of release prohibiting her from engaging in employment involving the solicitation of funds. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because the district court failed to state the reasons for imposing an out-of-guidelines sentence with the required specificity, we VACATE and REMAND.

The district court is required to state “in open court the reasons for its imposition of the particular sentence,” and must state a “specific reason” for the imposition of a sentence outside the guidelines. 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (c). This specific reason or reasons must be stated at the time of sentencing and explain both why a guidelines sentence *494 would not be sufficient and why the imposed sentence would be appropriate. United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1179 (9th Cir.2006). The imposed sentence of…