United States v. Max Plog-Horowitz ( 2015 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 10 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 14-10059
14-10060
Plaintiff - Appellee,
D.C. Nos. 4:12-cr-00661-CW
v. 4:13-cr-00337-CW
MAX JOSEPH PLOG-HOROWITZ, MEMORANDUM*
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Claudia Wilken, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 7, 2015**
Before: FISHER, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Max Joseph Plog-Horowitz appeals from the
district court’s judgments and challenges the 60-month sentence imposed
following his revocation of probation and guilty-plea conviction for being a felon
in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Plog-Horowitz contends that the district court improperly imposed a four-
level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). He argues that
there was insufficient evidence that he possessed the firearm in connection with the
felony of impersonating a federal officer. We review for clear error. See United
States v. Flores, 729 F.3d 910, 913 (9th Cir. 2013). The pistol that Plog-Horowitz
was convicted of possessing was found loaded and holstered along with law
enforcement credentials, clothing, and other weapons. In light of this and Plog-
Horowitz’s history of impersonating a federal officer, the district court did not
clearly err in finding that Plog-Horowitz intended to use or possess the firearm in
connection with the offense of impersonating a federal officer. See United States
v. Jimison, 493 F.3d 1148, 1149 (9th Cir. 2007). In any event, the district court
also found that Plog-Horowitz intended to possess or use the gun in connection
with the felony offense of conspiracy to commit insurance fraud and Plog-
Horowitz does not challenge that finding on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
2 14-10059 & 14-10060