Opinion
21-10237
05-31-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROBERT FRANCIS KREBS, Defendant-Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Submitted May 17, 2022 [**]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, No. 4:18-cr-00263-JGZ-JR-1 Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM [*]
Robert Francis Krebs appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 262-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Krebs contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his age and medical ailments. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Krebs's criminal history, the serious nature of the offense conduct, and the harm caused to the victims of the offense. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; 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."). Moreover, contrary to Krebs's contention, the record reflects that the district court considered his arguments and the § 3553(a) factors, and thoroughly explained why a lower sentence was not warranted. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
[*] 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).