Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8660780
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Stringer
No. 8660780 · Decided March 27, 2008
No. 8660780·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 27, 2008
Citation
No. 8660780
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Israel Stuart Stringer appeals from the revocation of his supervised release and the 18-month term of imprisonment imposed by the district court following revocation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Stringer contends that the uncorroborated testimony of an informant was insufficient evidence to support revocation of his supervised release. This contention fails. See United States v. Jeremiah, 493 F.3d 1042, 1045-46 (9th Cir.2007) (affirming revocation where a trier of fact could reasonably conclude that the defendant violated a condition of his supervised release). Stringer also contends that the 18-month sentence imposed following revocation is unreasonable. We conclude that the district court adequately considered the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e), and that Stringer’s sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597-98 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-64 (9th Cir.2007). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Israel Stuart Stringer appeals from the revocation of his supervised release and the 18-month term of imprisonment imposed by the district court following revocation.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Israel Stuart Stringer appeals from the revocation of his supervised release and the 18-month term of imprisonment imposed by the district court following revocation.
02Stringer contends that the uncorroborated testimony of an informant was insufficient evidence to support revocation of his supervised release.
03Jeremiah, 493 F.3d 1042, 1045-46 (9th Cir.2007) (affirming revocation where a trier of fact could reasonably conclude that the defendant violated a condition of his supervised release).
04Stringer also contends that the 18-month sentence imposed following revocation is unreasonable.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Israel Stuart Stringer appeals from the revocation of his supervised release and the 18-month term of imprisonment imposed by the district court following revocation.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Stringer in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 27, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8660780 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.