United States v. Jason Christensen ( 2019 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 18 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-30132
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-06027-LRS
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JASON PAUL CHRISTENSEN,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 15, 2019**
Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Jason Paul Christensen appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 32-month term of supervised release imposed upon revocation of
supervised release, and the condition of supervised release requiring him to reside
in a residential reentry center (“RRC”) for the first 90 days of his supervised
*
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).
release term. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Christensen argues that the RRC condition and the 32-month supervised
release term are substantively unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its
discretion. See United States v. Daniels, 541 F.3d 915, 924 (9th Cir. 2008).
Notwithstanding Christensen’s prior experience in an RRC, the RRC condition is
reasonably related to Christensen’s rehabilitation and involves no greater
deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary to achieve the purposes of
supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d); Daniels, 541 F.3d at 924.
Moreover, the 32-month term of supervised release is substantively reasonable in
light of the totality of the circumstances, including the entirety of Christensen’s
performance on his prior term of supervised release. See United States v. Hurt,
345 F.3d 1033, 1036 (9th Cir. 2003).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-30132