Opinion
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00049-KJD-PAL-1. Kent J. Dawson, District Judge, Presiding.
For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee: Nicholas Dana Dickinson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Camille W. Damm, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USLV - OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY, Las Vegas, NV; Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USRE - OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY, Reno, NV.
For JASON WEBB, Defendant - Appellant: Alina Maria Shell, Rene Valladares, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV.
Before: HUG, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Jason Webb appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm, 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 affirm.
Webb contends that the district court erred when it denied him a departure for imperfect duress under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.12. We do not review a district court's decision regarding whether to depart from the Sentencing Guidelines range. United States v. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d 1001, 1005-08 (9th Cir. 2012); United States v. Mohamed, 459 F.3d 979, 987 (9th Cir. 2006). Instead, if an appellant contends that the district court erred when deciding whether to grant a departure, we review the ultimate sentence for substantive reasonableness. Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d at 1008; Mohamed, 459 F.3d at 987. Webb contends that Mohamed is no longer good law because the Sentencing Commission subsequently amended U.S.S.G. § 1B1.1 and because the Supreme Court implicitly overruled Mohamed in United States v. Irizarry, 553 U.S. 708, 128 S.Ct. 2198, 171 L.Ed.2d 28 (2008). We already have rejected these arguments. See Vasquez-Cruz, 692 F.3d at 1005-08 (holding that amendment to § 1B1.1 did not abrogate Mohamed ); United States v. Tankersley, 537 F.3d 1100, 1114 n.11 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting argument that Irizarry undermined Mohamed )
We therefore review Webb's sentence for substantive reasonableness, applying an abuse of discretion standard. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The 77-month sentence, which is at the bottom of the applicable Guidelines range, is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, including Webb's prior conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm and other extensive criminal history, the seriousness of the offense, and the need for the sentence to promote respect for the law and provide deterrence. See id.
AFFIRMED.