United States v. Amanda McGee ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 23 2019
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 19-30003
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:18-cr-00083-TOR-1
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    AMANDA LEE MCGEE,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Washington
    Thomas O. Rice, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted August 19, 2019**
    Before:      SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    Amanda Lee McGee appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges the 24-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for
    being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 922
    (g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we
    *
    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).
    affirm.
    McGee challenges the district court’s denial of her request for a downward
    departure, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(b), for the alleged overrepresentation of
    her criminal history. We review this claim only as part of our overall review of the
    substantive reasonableness of the sentence, see United States v. Ellis, 
    641 F.3d 411
    , 421-22 (9th Cir. 2011), which McGee also challenges. The below-Guidelines
    sentence is not an abuse of discretion in light of the 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) sentencing
    factors and the totality of the circumstances, including McGee’s significant
    criminal history and the need to promote respect for the law. See Gall v. United
    States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51 (2007); see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 
    587 F.3d 904
    , 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a
    particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”). Further, contrary to
    McGee’s contention, the record reflects that the district court considered her
    mitigating arguments and the section 3553(a) factors and thoroughly explained its
    reasons for the sentence. See United States v. Carty, 
    520 F.3d 984
    , 992 (9th Cir.
    2008) (en banc).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                     19-30003
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-30003

Filed Date: 8/23/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/23/2019