United States v. Melissa Jimenez , 469 F. App'x 541 ( 2012 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 24 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-50426
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:04-cr-02105-BEN
v.
MEMORANDUM *
MELISSA JIMENEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 21, 2012 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Melissa Jimenez appeals from the 12-month sentence imposed following the
revocation of her supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Jimenez contends that the district court procedurally erred because it failed
to explain its reasons for imposing an above-Guidelines sentence. She also
contends that her sentence is substantively unreasonable because the sentence is
longer than necessary. Jimenez’s contentions are not supported by the record. The
district court did not procedurally err, and Jimenez’s sentence is reasonable in light
of the totality of the circumstances and the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing
factors. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. Carty,
520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Jimenez last contends that 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) is unconstitutional under
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). As she concedes, this contention is
foreclosed by United States v. Huerta-Pimental, 445 F.3d 1220, 1223-25 (9th Cir.
2006), and United States v. Santana, 526 F.3d 1257, 1262 (9th Cir. 2008).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-50426