Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8644260
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Hamilton
No. 8644260 · Decided October 1, 2007
No. 8644260·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
October 1, 2007
Citation
No. 8644260
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** James E. Hamilton appeals from the 188-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for reasonableness, United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and we affirm. Hamilton contends that his sentence is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a). However, the record indicates that the sentencing judge articulated a “reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decisionmaking authority” to impose a sentence at the low end of the Guidelines range. Rita v. United States, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2468 , 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007). We therefore conclude that the sentence is not unreasonable. See id. at 2470 . AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
Hamilton appeals from the 188-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
Key Points
01Hamilton appeals from the 188-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
02Hamilton contends that his sentence is unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing set forth in 18 U.S.C.
03However, the record indicates that the sentencing judge articulated a “reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decisionmaking authority” to impose a sentence at the low end of the Guidelines range.
04We therefore conclude that the sentence is not unreasonable.
Frequently Asked Questions
Hamilton appeals from the 188-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Hamilton in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on October 1, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8644260 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.