UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leonard Frank CATTERLIN, Defendant-Appellant.
Decided: July 23, 2020
Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, Timothy John Racicot, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USMI - Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, Ryan George Weldon, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USGF - Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee Craig Shannon, Attorney, Shannon Law Office, Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant
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.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.