Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 9412696
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Clifton Peter
No. 9412696 · Decided July 11, 2023
No. 9412696·Ninth Circuit · 2023·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
July 11, 2023
Citation
No. 9412696
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 11 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-30150
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 1:20-cr-02024-SAB-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CLIFTON FRANK PETER,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Stanley A. Bastian, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2023**
Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Clifton Frank Peter appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 600-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction
for three counts of second-degree murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111 and
1153. 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).
Peter contends that his above-Guidelines sentence is substantively
unreasonable because it is a de facto life sentence, which is a sentence imposed for
murders committed with premeditation. He argues that, although tragic, his
offense “remains within the heartland” of the second-degree murder guideline, and
his mental state of extreme intoxication distinguishes his conduct from that of
premediated, first-degree murder. The district court did not abuse its discretion.
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Under the facts of this case, the
district court reasonably concluded that the applicable Guidelines range did not
adequately account for the fact that Peter committed three murders. See United
States v. Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1100-01 (9th Cir. 2013) (sentencing court
may conclude that the applicable Guideline range does not sufficiently account for
the nature and circumstances of the defendant’s particular offense). The above-
Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable under the totality of the
circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, including the serious nature of
the offense, Peter’s history and characteristics, and the need to protect the public.
See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.
2 22-30150
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 11 2023 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 11 2023 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No.
03Bastian, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 26, 2023** Before: CANBY, S.R.
04Clifton Frank Peter appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 600-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for three counts of second-degree murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 11 2023 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Clifton Peter in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on July 11, 2023.
Use the citation No. 9412696 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.