Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
No. 15-4756
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:15-cr-00168-JAG-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Felix Joel Luna Caban was convicted by a magistrate judge
of
violating
his
imprisonment.
affirmed.
now
appeals
imposed
unreasonable.
and
sentenced
to
10
months
He
sentence
probation
by
to
the
this
court,
magistrate
arguing
judge
that
was
the
plainly
We affirm.
determine
whether
it
is
plainly
unreasonable.
United
whether
the
sentence
is
unreasonable,
We first
follow[ing]
sentence,
concerning
discretion
sentences.
at 439).
than
we
apply
issues
of
more
fact
reasonableness
United States v.
In reviewing a
deferential
and
review
the
for
appellate
exercise
of
guidelines
at 439.
A
revocation
sentence
is
procedurally
reasonable
if
the
3553(a)
(2012)
factors.
Moulden,
478
F.3d
at
656;
see
595
is
F.3d
544,
substantively
547
(4th
Cir.
reasonable
United States v.
2010).
if
the
revocation
court
stated
The sentence
sentencing
court
retains
broad
discretion
However,
to
revoke
procedurally
erred
in
failing
to
adequately
address
Cabans
judges
sentence.
statement
indication
arguments
that
raised
of
it
by
However,
reasons
was
considered
both
parties
we
conclude
adequate
the
to
the
provide
potentially
about
magistrate
some
meritorious
sentencing.
United
States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 380 (4th Cir. 2006); cf.
United States v. Cunningham, 429 F.3d 673, 679 (7th Cir. 2005)
(discussing
courts
failure
to
address
defendants
arguments
magistrate
judge
implicitly
rejected
Luna
Cabans
violations
in
observing
his
longstanding
pattern
of
weight
on
the
record
by
single
as
factor
if,
whole.
See
as
here,
United
it
is
States
v.
Caban
faults
the
Cabans
financial
acknowledging
Luna
incarceration
would
compound
magistrate
these
judge
obligations
financial
or
for
not
that
his
challenges
by
precisely
payments,
yet
Luna
to
permit
Caban
had
importance
On
the
which
of
whole,
was
Luna
Caban
failed
to
to
make
comply
continued
with
the
statement
conclude
both
4
the
tailored
of
reasons
magistrate
to
the
in
judges
specific
adequately
demonstrated
that
he
considered
the
330,
343
(4th
2013)
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted).
Finally, Luna Caban argues that his sentence, which was two
months
below
the
statutory
maximum,
was
substantively
conclude that the court acted well within its broad discretion
in sentencing Luna Caban to the middle of his policy statement
range.
Accordingly, we affirm the district courts judgment.
dispense
with
contentions
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
We
and
legal
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED