United States of America v. Cory Misraje, a.k.a. Cory Spencer Misraje

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CORY MISRAJE, a.k.a. Cory Spencer
Misraje,
Defendant - Appellant.
Nos. 14-50405
15-50321
D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00992-PSG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 25, 2015**
Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Cory Misraje appeals from the district court’s
judgment and challenges the imposed GPS monitoring as a condition of supervised
release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Misraje contends that the district court erred by modifying his conditions of
* 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).
FILED
SEP 2 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-50405 & 15-50321
supervised release to include GPS monitoring because it did not first hold an
evidentiary hearing, and because the condition was not reasonably related to the
goals of supervision and imposed a greater deprivation of liberty than reasonably
necessary. We review for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Weber, 451
F.3d 552, 557 (9th Cir. 2006). Contrary to Misraje’s contention, the district court
was not required to hold an evidentiary hearing before modifying a supervised
release condition. See United States v. King, 608 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2010).
Moreover, in light of Misraje’s history and need to protect the public, the district
court did not abuse its discretion by imposing the GPS monitoring condition. See
Weber, 451 F.3d at 557-58.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --