DocketNumber: 18-10276
Filed Date: 2/21/2019
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 21 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10276 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00287-GEB v. MEMORANDUM* DEMETRI DEARTH, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Garland E. Burrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 19, 2019** Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Demetri Dearth appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 12-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for making false statements and mail fraud, in violation of18 U.S.C. §§ 1001
and 1341. We have jurisdiction under28 U.S.C. § 1291
, and we affirm. * 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). Dearth contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the nature of the offense, her largely law-abiding life, her difficult childhood, her performance on pretrial release, and her role as a caregiver to her mother and spouse. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States,552 U.S. 38
, 51 (2007). Dearth’s sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the18 U.S.C. § 3553
(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the number of crimes Dearth committed, the risk Dearth created to public safety, and the need to achieve deterrence. See Gall,552 U.S. at 51
. The record does not support Dearth’s contention that the district court failed to consider her caretaking role. Moreover, the court adequately explained the sentence. See United States v. Carty,520 F.3d 984
, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). AFFIRMED. 2 18-10276