Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Claudia Wilken, District Judge, Presiding.
Before HUG, O'SCANNLAIN and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Jerome Kendricks appeals his guilty plea conviction for one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Kendricks contends that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause in light of United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 131 L.Ed.2d 626 (1995), United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 120 S.Ct. 1740, 146 L.Ed.2d 658 (2000), and Jones v. United States, 529 U.S. 848, 120 S.Ct. 1904, 146 L.Ed.2d 902 (2000). We have repeatedly rejected this contention, see United States v. Jones, 231 F.3d 508, 513-15 (9th Cir.2000), United States v. Davis, 242 F.3d 1162, 1162-63 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 878, 122 S.Ct. 178, 151 L.Ed.2d 123 (2001), and United States v. Rousseau, 257 F.3d 925, 932-33 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1013, 122 S.Ct. 503, 151 L.Ed.2d 413 (2001), and do so here. See United States v. Carrasco, 257 F.3d 1045, 1053 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1061, 122 S.Ct. 658, 151 L.Ed.2d 574 (2001).
AFFIRMED.