USA V. JUAN VAUGHAN, No. 11-50233 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 09 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff -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. 11-50233 D.C. No. 3:06-cr-00097-BTM v. MEMORANDUM * JUAN CARLOS VAUGHAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Barry T. Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 6, 2012 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. Juan Carlos Vaughan appeals from the 24-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). Vaughan contends that his statutory maximum sentence is substantively unreasonable. This is Vaughan s fifth supervised release revocation, which reflects a continued breach of the court s trust. The sentence is not unreasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). In his reply brief, Vaughan raises for the first time the argument that the district court erred by departing upward from the Guidelines. He forfeited this argument by failing to raise it in his opening brief, and no exceptions to this rule apply. See Koerner v. Grigas, 328 F.3d 1039, 1048 49 (9th Cir. 2003). AFFIRMED. 2 11-50233

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.