NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 8 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-30016

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00021-RMP-19 v.

MEMORANDUM* COURTNEY D. VAUGHN,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

Rosanna Malouf Peterson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 2, 2020** Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Courtney D. Vaughn appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed following his third revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Vaughn contends that the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively

*

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). unreasonable because the district court placed too much emphasis on his poor history on supervised release instead of focusing on his mitigating arguments regarding his efforts to become a better father and his mental health issues. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The 24-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Vaughn’s repeated breaches of the district court’s trust and his refusal to avail himself of opportunities presented by the court. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007) (primary purpose of revocation sentence is to sanction defendant’s breach of the court’s trust).

AFFIRMED.

2 20-30016