
    UNITED STATES Of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tyrone GLOVER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-50239.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 5, 2012.
    
    Filed Nov. 7, 2012.
    Curtis A. Kin, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Shawn Jeffery Nelson, Assistant U.S., Office Of The U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Callie Glanton Steele, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’S Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: GRABER, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Defendant Tyrone Glover appeals (1) the district court’s finding that he violated the terms of his supervised release and (2) the resulting sentence of 60 months’ imprisonment. We affirm.

1. Sufficient evidence, which included evidence that Defendant had pleaded nolo contendere to felony charges in California court, supported the district court’s finding that the government proved both allegations. United States v. Verduzco, 330 F.3d 1182, 1185-86 (9th Cir.2003).

2. The district court neither abused its discretion nor imposed an unreasonable sentence when it imposed a within-Guidelines sentence. See generally United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 991-93 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). The district court properly considered the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) and did not rely on an impermissible factor as a primary basis for its sentence. United States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1181-83 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     