Opinion
No. 12-30031 D.C. No. 2:02-cr-00282-FVS
09-21-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JULIUS DARNELL ROBERTS, Defendant - Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Fred L. Van Sickle, District Judge, Presiding
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Julius Darnell Roberts appeals from the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Roberts contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion to reduce his sentence because the court double counted his criminal history and failed to consider adequately his post-conviction rehabilitation. The court considered Roberts's post-conviction rehabilitation and properly based its decision on public safety considerations and the need for deterrence. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(B); United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.