United States v. 2020-12-08 | 20-30016 | USA V. COURTNEY VAUGHN | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

COURTNEY D. VAUGHN,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 20-30016

D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00021-RMP-19

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Rosanna Malouf Peterson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 2, 2020
**

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Courtney D. Vaughn appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 24-month sentence imposed following his third revocation of
supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Vaughn contends that the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively

*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED

DEC 8 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 20-30016
unreasonable because the district court placed too much emphasis on his poor
history on supervised release instead of focusing on his mitigating arguments
regarding his efforts to become a better father and his mental health issues. The
district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38,
51 (2007). The 24-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18
U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including
Vaughn’s repeated breaches of the district court’s trust and his refusal to avail
himself of opportunities presented by the court. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; United
States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007) (primary purpose of
revocation sentence is to sanction defendant’s breach of the court’s trust).
AFFIRMED.