USA V. ROBERT ARBAUGH, No. 14-10068 (9th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED AUG 19 2014 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 14-10068 D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00008-PMP v. MEMORANDUM* ROBERT LEE ARBAUGH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Philip M. Pro, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 13, 2014** Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Robert Lee Arbaugh appeals from the district court s judgment and challenges the 9-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). Arbaugh contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the minor nature of his violations of supervised release. To the contrary, the violations were not minor and the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Arbaugh s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (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 Arbaugh s breach of the district court s trust. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir. 2007). AFFIRMED. 2 14-10068

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.