United States v. Theresa Hall , 360 F. App'x 898 ( 2009 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 30 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 08-50088
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:04-cr-00732-RSWL-3
v.
MEMORANDUM *
THERESA HALL, aka Girl Blue,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 11, 2009
Pasadena, California
Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Theresa Hall appeals the district court’s imposition of two supervised release
conditions following her guilty plea to violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 370 (conspiracy),
2113(a), (d) (attempted and armed bank robbery), and 924(c) (discharge of a
firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence). Hall also appeals the district
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
court’s imposition of a 121-month prison term as unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. §
3553(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
We review for plain error the adequacy of the district court’s notice of
supervised release conditions because Hall did not object at sentencing. See
United States v. Hernandez, 251 F.3d 1247, 1250 (9th Cir. 2001). The district did
not plainly err in providing Hall with notice that it could impose a twenty-hour-
per-week community service condition because U.S.S.G. § 5F1.3 contemplates the
imposition of community service. See United States v. Wise, 391 F.3d 1027,
1032-33 (9th Cir. 2004).
We likewise review for plain error the challenged supervised release
conditions because Hall did not object at sentencing. See United States v. Sales,
476 F.3d 732, 735 (9th Cir. 2007). The district court did not plainly err in
imposing the community service condition because this condition is related to
Hall’s rehabilitation, further education, and prevention of recidivism. See United
States v. Vega, 545 F.3d 743, 748 (9th Cir. 2008). The district court did not
plainly err in imposing gang-related conditions because of Hall’s known affiliation
with the Rollin’ 30s Harlem Crips gang. See United States v. Soltero, 510 F.3d
858, 865-67 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam).
2
We do not review Hall’s contention that the district court’s imposition of a
121-month sentence was unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) because, as
demonstrated by the statements of counsel and Hall at sentencing, both the
government and Hall understood that a final offense level of 20 triggered the
appellate waiver in the plea agreement. See United States v. De la Fuente, 8 F.3d
1333, 1337 (9th Cir. 1993) (“In construing an agreement, [we] must determine
what the defendant reasonably understood to be the terms of the agreement when
he pleaded guilty.”).
We have considered and reject all other issues raised on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
3