Case ID: f-appx_291/html/0852-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Louis Charles MORGAN, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 06-50234.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.
    
    Filed Sept. 10, 2008.
    Becky S. Walker, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, Robert Gannon, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Santa Ana, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Elizabeth A. Newman, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Louis Charles Morgan appeals from the district court’s decision, following a limited remand under United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc), that it would not have imposed a different sentence had it known that the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Morgan contends that the district court erred by failing to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors during the Ameline remand. We conclude that the district court “properly understood the full scope of [its] discretion in a post-Booker world.” See United States v. Combs, 470 F.3d 1294,1297 (9th Cir.2006).

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