T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yf i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. F R I T Z AN DE R S ON , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N os . 08- 30469, 08- 30470 D . C t . N o. 1: 07- C R - 00112- R F C - 1, D . C t . N o. 1: 07 -C R -000 15 -R F C -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe D i s tr i c tof

M ont a na R i c ha r d F . C e bul l , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r8, 2009 ** P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: F A R R IS , D . W . N E L S O N , an d B E R Z O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. F r i t z A nde r s on w a s c ha r ge d w i th 29 c ount s of drug tr a f

f i c ki ng i n vi ol a t i on o f 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 1 a n d o n e c o u n t o f u s in g , c a rry in g o rp o s s e s s in g af ir e a rm in r e l a t i on t o drug tr a f

f i c ki ng i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . § 924( c ) . A nde r s on m ove d f or 

# FI LED DE C 21 2009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

a c qui tt a l on the f

i na l c ount ; the di s tr i c tc ourtgr a nt e d the m ot i on a s t o us i ng or carryi ng a f

i re arm bu tdeni ed the m ot i on as t o p osse ss i ng a f i re arm i n furtherance o f ad ru g c r im e a n d le t th e c o u n t s ta n d . T h e ju ryc o n v ic te d A n d e r s o n o n a ll th irty c ount s , a nd the c ourti m pos e d as e nt e nc e of 40 y e a r s ( 480 m onths ) . A nde r s on t i m e l y appe a l e d.

“ [W ] e r evi ew the di stri ctcourt ’ s deni al of a m ot i on t o acqui tde no vo . ” U ni ted Stat es v. Mosley , 4 6 5 F .3 d 4 1 2 , 4 1 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . “ [ A ] de f e nda ntw ho ac ce p ts fire ar m s in ex ch an g e f o r d ru g s p o ss es se s th e f irea rm s ‘in fu rth er an ce o f’ a drug tra ff

i cki ng offe nse. ” U

ni te d State s v . M

ahan , N o . 0 8 - 3 0 4 7 5 , s lip o p . a t 8 ( 9 th C i r . N ov. 16, 2009) . B e c aus e A nde r s on a c c e pt e d f i r e a rm s a s pa rt i a l pa y m e ntf or out s t a ndi ng drug de bt s , he pos s e s s e d thos e f i r e a rm s i n f

urthe r a nc e of

hi s drug tr a f f ic k in g o f f e n s e s , a n d th e d is tr ic t c o u rt w a s c o rr e c t to d e n yh is m o tio n to a c q u it. T he s ubs t a nt i ve r e a s onabl e ne s s of as e nt e nc e i s r e vi e w e d unde ra n abus e of d is c r e tio n s ta n d a r d . U

n ite d S ta te s v . Ca r ty , 52 0 F . 3d 98 4, 99 3 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( en banc). “ F or a non -G ui del i nes s ent ence , w e are t o ‘ gi ve du e def er ence t o the di stri ct c ourt ' s de c i s i on tha tthe § 3553( a ) f a c t or s , on aw hol e , j us t i f ythe e xt e ntof

the vari ance . ’ ” I

d. ( quot i ng G al l

v. U ni ted Stat es , 5 5 2 U .S . 3 8 , 5 1 ( 2 0 0 7 ) ) . N o th in g in the re cord sugg es t s thatJudg e C ebul l abused hi s di sc re t i on w hen h e depart ed dow nw a r d s i gni f

i c a nt l y , butnota s f

a ra s M r . A nde r s on w oul d ha ve pr e f e rr e d, f r om the gu i del i ne se nt ence .3

AF F I R ME D.