UNITED STATES v. CHARLES (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Michael DeShawn Charles appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 18-month sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Charles argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the circumstances surrounding his violations of supervision were not sufficiently aggravating to justify the court’s upward variance from the Guidelines range of 7-13 months. 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) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Charles’s repeated refusals to cooperate with the terms of supervision and the fact that he absconded for nine months while on supervision. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586. Moreover, contrary to Charles’s claim, the record as a whole reflects that the district court properly considered the section 3583(e) sentencing factors and adequately explained its reasons for imposing an above-Guidelines sentence. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 359, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).

AFFIRMED.