USA v. Stephen Farrell, No. 10-30137 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED OCT 28 2010 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 10-30137 D.C. No. 6:08-cr-00023-DWM v. MEMORANDUM * STEPHEN FARRELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Stephen Farrell appeals from the ten-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Farrell contends that the district court erred by considering impermissible factors at sentencing. The record shows that the district court did not rely on impermissible factors as a primary basis for [the] revocation sentence. United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006). Farrell also contends that the sentence imposed is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). AFFIRMED. 2 10-30137

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.