United States of America v. Kerry P. Rutherford

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KERRY P. RUTHERFORD,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50246
D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00977-R
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 14, 2013**
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Kerry P. Rutherford appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 54-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
access device fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2); and aggravated identity
theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
FILED
MAY 20 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50246 2
§ 1291, and we affirm.
Rutherford contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
consider his history and characteristics and by failing to explain adequately the
sentence imposed. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-
Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The district court
satisfied its obligations under 18 U.S.C. § 3553 by considering the evidence and
arguments before imposing a sentence at the low end of the advisory Sentencing
Guidelines range. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 358-59 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --