United States of America v. Tyler Benton Hughes

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TYLER BENTON HUGHES,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 22-30073
D.C. No. 6:04-cr-00017-BM-2
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 8, 2022**
Before: WALLACE, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Tyler Benton Hughes appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 18-month sentence imposed upon his fourth revocation of
supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Hughes contends that the 18-month sentence is substantively unreasonable
* 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). Hughes’s request for oral
argument is, therefore, denied.
FILED
DEC 16 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-30073
in light of a previous comment by a magistrate judge that he would receive a 12-
month sentence for any new violations. We disagree. The magistrate judge’s
comment, made before Hughes committed three additional violations, did not bind
the sentencing court. In light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the
totality of the circumstances, including Hughes’s repeated breaches of the court’s
trust and his unwillingness to participate meaningfully in supervision, the district
court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the above-Guidelines sentence. See
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d
1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007) (purpose of a revocation sentence is to sanction the
defendant’s breach of the court’s trust).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --