Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
D.C. No. CR-95-00029-SC
Editorial Note:This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Samuel Conti, District Judge, Presiding.
Before SNEED, SCHROEDER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Gail C. Dixon appeals from the district court's order revoking supervised release and the nine-month sentence the district court imposed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Dixon contends that the record lacks sufficient evidence to support the district court's findings that she violated three conditions of her supervised release. We disagree. The district court, after hearing conflicting testimony from both Dixon and probation officer Glenn Simon, explicitly rejected Dixon's testimony and found all allegations true. See Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573-75 (1985); United States v. Williams, 978 F.2d 1133, 1135 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam) (district court's credibility determinations accorded "great deference" on appeal). Given the substance of Simon's testimony and the supporting documentary evidence, the district court's conclusions are supported by a preponderance of the evidence and do not constitute an abuse of discretion. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3); United States v. Schmidt, 99 F.3d 315, 319-20 (9th Cir.1996); United States v. Lomayaoma, 86 F.3d 142, 146-47 (9th Cir.1996).
AFFIRMED.