U.S. v. VAN TUYL, 401 Fed.Appx. 283 (9th Cir. 2010)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Keegan C. VAN TUYL,Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-30020.United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Submitted October 19, 2010.[fn*]
Filed October 28, 2010.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.][fn*] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Earl Allan Hicks, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
John H. Loeffler, Esquire, Olson, Loeffler Landis, P.S., Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, Lonny E. Suko, Chief Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00133-LRS.
Before: O'SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM[fn**]
[fn**] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Keegan C. Van Tuyl appeals from the sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. ยง 1291. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.
Van Tuyl's sole contention is that the supervised release condition prohibiting association with Neo-Nazi/white supremacist affiliates is unconstitutionally overbroad. The government agrees that the judgment should be changed to explicitly reflect that the condition prohibits association with known neo-Nazi/white supremacist affiliates. Under these circumstances, we vacate the challenged condition and remand for the district court to resentence in a manner consistent with this opinion.See, e.g. United States v. Ross, 476 F.3d 719 (9th Cir. 2007). The sentence is affirmed in all other respects.
VACATED in part; AFFIRMED in part; and REMANDED.