UNITED STATES v. SEIBERT (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Jack Seibert appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 21-month custodial sentence and 12-month supervised release term imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Seibert contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the government’s delay in prosecuting him foreclosed the possibility that he serve his revocation sentence concurrently with the sentence imposed for the state court conviction giving rise to the violation, and because the Bureau of Prisons is unable to meet his medical and neurological needs while he is in custody. He additionally contends that the supervision term is substantively unreasonable because he will serve one year of state parole upon release. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Seibert’s criminal history and his failure to be deterred by prior sentences. See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) & cmt. n.4; Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586.

AFFIRMED.