FlawCheck Citator
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 11 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-30150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
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.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →