Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry DILLIEHUNT, aka Donald Holland, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-08-06
Citations: 286 F. App'x 520
Docket Number: No. 06-10542
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry DILLIEHUNT, aka Donald Holland, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 286
Pages: 520–520

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry DILLIEHUNT, aka Donald Holland, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-10542.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 22, 2008.
Filed Aug. 6, 2008.
George L. Bevan, Jr., Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Oakland, CA, Robert David Rees, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Steven S. Lubliner, Esquire, Law Offices of Steven S. Lubliner, Petaluma, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jerry Dilliehunt appeals from the 38-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Dilliehunt contends that the district court erred by increasing his offense level by two levels for reckless endangerment pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2. We conclude that the district court's application of the enhancement was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Reyes-Oseguera, 106 F.3d 1481, 1484 (9th Cir.1997).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.