United States v. Floyd Best, Jr. , 693 F. App'x 610 ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 6 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-30030
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:15-cr-00031-JLQ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
FLOYD DEAN BEST, Jr.,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Justin L. Quackenbush, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2017**
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Floyd Dean Best, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the ten-year term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-
plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of a
methamphetamine mixture or substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
(b)(1)(B) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Best contends that the district court impermissibly imposed the term of
supervised release to punish him. We review for plain error, see United States v.
Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that the
district court did not plainly err. Contrary to Best’s contention, the record reflects
that the district court properly based the term of supervised release on Best’s
history and characteristics, as well as the need for deterrence, and did not rely on
any improper factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c).
Moreover, the ten-year term of supervised release is substantively
reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(c) factors and the totality of the
circumstances, including the need to deter Best from future criminal conduct. See
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-30030