UNITED STATES v. CATTERLIN (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

Leonard Frank Catterlin appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the eight-month sentence imposed upon his second revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Catterlin contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because he needs community-based treatment rather than incarceration. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the within-Guidelines sentence. 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, as the district court highlighted, Catterlin's repeated violations of supervised release. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586; United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir. 2007). To the extent Catterlin contends that the court impermissibly imposed the sentence to punish him, the record reflects that the district court relied on only proper sentencing factors. See Simtob, 485 F.3d at 1062.

AFFIRMED.