Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George ROWLAND, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-06-13
Citations: 37 F. App'x 304
Docket Number: No. 01-10098; D.C. No. CR-00-40123 CW
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George ROWLAND, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 37
Pages: 304–305

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. George ROWLAND, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-10098.
D.C. No. CR-00-40123 CW.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 10, 2002.
Decided June 13, 2002.
Before RYMER, T.G. NELSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
George Rowland 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.
Rowland 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,—U.S.—, 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,—U.S.—, 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,—U.S. —, 122 S.Ct. 658, 151 L.Ed.2d 574 (2001).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
. Rowland's request for an initial hearing en banc is denied. See Fed. R.App. P. 35(a).