FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10340568
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States v. Saksa

No. 10340568 · Decided February 26, 2025
No. 10340568 · Ninth Circuit · 2025 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
February 26, 2025
Citation
No. 10340568
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 26 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-5642 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 1:18-cr-00161-SPW-1 v. MEMORANDUM* DUSTIN NEAL SAKSA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 18, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and DESAI, Circuit Judges. Dustin Neal Saksa appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 8-month sentence imposed upon the revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.1 * 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). 1 The government’s motion for judicial notice is granted. Saksa contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it fails to give sufficient weight to his substance abuse issues and his need for inpatient treatment. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the within-Guidelines sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). As the court explained, Saksa had violated the terms of his supervision in multiple ways “despite knowing very well what is expected of [him].” In light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, the 8- month sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007) (purpose of a revocation sentence is to sanction the defendant’s breach of the court’s trust). AFFIRMED. 2 24-5642
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 26 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 26 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Saksa in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on February 26, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10340568 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 →