Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8648229
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Farias
No. 8648229 · Decided March 10, 2008
No. 8648229·Ninth Circuit · 2008·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
March 10, 2008
Citation
No. 8648229
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Farias appeals from the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1347 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. We construe Farias’ one paragraph argument to challenge the reasonableness of his sentence and to contend that the district court erred by failing to reduce his restitution amount. We conclude that Farias’ sentence is reasonable. See Gall v. United States, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597-98 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Additionally, because the restitution amount ordered was the amount contemplated in the plea agreement, and because Farias failed to object during sentencing, we conclude that the district court did not plainly err in determining the amount of restitution. See United States v. Zink, 107 F.3d 716, 719-20 (9th Cir.1997). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Farias appeals from the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Farias appeals from the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
02We construe Farias’ one paragraph argument to challenge the reasonableness of his sentence and to contend that the district court erred by failing to reduce his restitution amount.
03Additionally, because the restitution amount ordered was the amount contemplated in the plea agreement, and because Farias failed to object during sentencing, we conclude that the district court did not plainly err in determining the amount
04This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Carlos Farias appeals from the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Farias in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 10, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8648229 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.