USA V. JOHN ASEPH, No. 10-10458 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 19 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff -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. 10-10458 D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00363-GMN v. MEMORANDUM * JOHN ASEPH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 17, 2012 ** Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges. John Aseph appeals from the 51-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for six counts of wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. 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). Aseph contends that the district court abused its discretion by basing his sentence on an unreliable amount of loss not substantiated by either probation or the parties. The district court correctly calculated the advisory guidelines range based on the stipulated amount of loss. Contrary to Aseph s contention, the district court did not select a sentence at the high end of the guidelines range based on its belief that the loss was greater than the stipulated amount. Rather, the court properly considered the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors in arriving at a substantively reasonable, within-Guidelines sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). AFFIRMED. 2 10-10458

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.