Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth R. OLSEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-05-28
Citations: 280 F. App'x 624
Docket Number: No. 05-30487
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Kenneth R. OLSEN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 280
Pages: 624–625

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Kenneth R. OLSEN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-30487.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 20, 2008.
Filed May 28, 2008.
Earl Allan Hicks, Esq., Stephanie Whitaker, Esq., USSP-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Tracy Staab, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PREGERSON, TASHIMA, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Kenneth R. Olsen appeals from the 121-month sentence imposed upon remand following his jury-trial conviction for possessing a biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 175. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Olsen contends that the district court failed to explain why it determined that U.S.S.G. § 2M6.1 was the most analogous Sentencing Guideline in effect at the time of his offense and failed to consider alternative Guidelines. This contention is belied by the record.
Olsen also contends that the district court's discussion of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors was inadequate and that the district court treated the Guidelines as mandatory. The district court did not procedurally err. See Gall v. United States, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597,169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Further, Olsen's sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See id.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.