Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Zollie Louis BYRD, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-01-05
Citations: 407 F. App'x 260
Docket Number: No. 10-30087
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Zollie Louis BYRD, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 407
Pages: 260–261

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Zollie Louis BYRD, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-30087.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 14, 2010.
Filed Jan. 5, 2011.
Paulette Lynn Stewart, Assistant U.S., USHE-Offlce of the U.S. Attorney, Helena, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
David F. Ness, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FDMT-Federal Defenders of Montana, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, 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
Zollie Louis Byrd appeals from the 68-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for possession of an unregistered machine gun, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5841, 5861(d) and 5871. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Byrd contends that the district court erred in using his prior firearms conviction as a basis for imposing a 3-level sentencing enhancement under 18 U.S.C. § 3147, and in calculating his criminal history score. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Tavakkoly, 238 F.3d 1062, 1068 (9th Cir.2001). See also United States v. Garcia-Cardenas, 555 F.3d 1049, 1050 (9th Cir.2009) ("We previously have rejected [defendant's] claim that the use of a prior conviction as a basis for a sentencing enhancement and for calculating a defendant's criminal history score constitutes impermissible double counting.").
Byrd also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is longer than necessary in light of his background and the circumstances surrounding his offense. The record reflects that Byrd's guideline sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51-52, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.