Opinion
No. 14-50350
08-23-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICHARD M. ROSSIGNOL, Defendant-Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00995-ABC MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California
Audrey B. Collins, District Judge, Presiding Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Richard M. Rossignol appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 240-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Rossignol contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the alleged sentencing disparity between his sentence and that of his co-conspirator, and because the 24-level enhancement he received under U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(m) overstated the seriousness of the offense. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the number of victims and the loss amount. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; see also United States v. Ressam, 679 F.3d 1069, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc) (finding no unwarranted sentencing disparity between individuals who plead guilty and those who put the government to its burden of proof).
AFFIRMED.