NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 14 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-30236 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:18-cr-00062-WFN-1 v. WILLIAM MARTIN SHAWL, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington Wm. Fremming Nielsen, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 11, 2019** Before: CANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

William Martin Shawl appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for escape from custody, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 751(a) and 4082(a). 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).

Shawl contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the mitigating factors, including his difficult upbringing, the recent deaths in his family, and the non-serious nature of the offense. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The record reflects that the court considered Shawl’s arguments but concluded that an above- Guidelines sentence was warranted. The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Shawl’s significant criminal history and the need to protect the public. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; 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.”).

AFFIRMED.

2 18-30236