Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adam Michael HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-02-25
Citations: 594 F. App'x 375
Docket Number: No. 14-10227
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adam Michael HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 594
Pages: 375–375

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adam Michael HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10227.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 17, 2015.
Filed Feb. 25, 2015.
Christina .Brown, Assistant U.S., Michael Anthony Humphreys, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Alina Maria Shell, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Adam Michael Harris appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 37-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a convicted felon in 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.
Harris contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the circumstances of the offense. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Harris's sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The sentence at the bottom of the Guidelines range is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Harris's criminal history and the need to promote respect for the law. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.