United States of America v. Gary Thornhill

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
GARY THORNHILL,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-10420
D.C. No. 5:16-cr-00127-LHK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Lucy H. Koh, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Gary Thornhill appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
60-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea convictions for mail fraud
and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
* 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
MAY 17 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-10420
Thornhill contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because it
was premised on the district court’s erroneous finding that Thornhill lied to his
friends and relatives about the nature of the offense and his efforts to make
restitution. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Thornhill’s
sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The record shows
that the court imposed the sentence on the basis of several factors, and did not base
the sentence on clearly erroneous factual findings. The above-Guidelines sentence
is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors
and the totality of the circumstances, including Thornhill’s longstanding and
profitable business relationship with the victim. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --