United States of America v. Marcus Emilio Villarreal

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARCUS EMILIO VILLARREAL,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 23-462
D.C. No.1:15-cr-00051-BLW-2
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 12, 2023**
Before: WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.
Marcus Emilio Villarreal appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 24-month sentence imposed upon the third revocation of his
supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Villarreal contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because
* 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 18 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 23-462
the district court failed to adequately account for his progress on supervision and
his mitigating factors. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The above-Guidelines, statutory maximum
sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) factors and
the totality of the circumstances, including Villarreal’s repeated breaches of the
court’s trust. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51 (stating totality of the circumstances
standard); United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding
that a revocation sentence may be imposed as a sanction for the defendant’s breach
of the court’s trust); see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904,
908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case
is for the discretion of the district court.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --