Otero

United States v. Otero

Good Law
275 F. App'x 591
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 22, 2008No. 07-50275California360 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Jessica Otero appeals the district court’s imposition of a twenty-four-month sentence in her probation revocation hearing. *592 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court adequately considered the policy statements in Chapter 7 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. See United States v. George, 184 F.3d 1119, 1122 (9th Cir.1999) (“The Chapter 7 policy statements are ‘mandatory’ only to the extent that the district court must consider them in calculating a sentence upon revocation of supervised release; the district court, however, is not bound by the ranges stated in Chapter 7.”). The Chapter 7 range was included in the defendant’s sentencing memorandum, which the court indicated it had “received” and “considered.” The range was also before the court in the Probation Department’s Presentence Report. Finally, the court indicated that it was upwardly departing from the guideline range and gave sufficient reasons for the upward departure: Otero had been kicked out of two rehabilitation facilities for having a bad attitude and malignancy toward others; she unlawfully possessed and used drugs during her probationary period;…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.