Court Opinion

ID: 9891902
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-19 19:00:44.954428+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.784541
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       OCT 19 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 23-398
                                                D.C. No. 4:22-cr-00248-JSW-1
             Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
RICHARD STEWART,

             Defendant - Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of California
                    Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted October 10, 2023**

Before:      S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

      Richard Stewart appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

the 54-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a

felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
       Stewart contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it

fails to adequately account for his traumatic childhood, his recent rehabilitative

efforts, the added burden of imprisonment during the COVID-19 pandemic, and

the need to avoid sentencing disparities. The district court did not abuse its

discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The within-

Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)

sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Stewart’s

lengthy criminal history, the nature of his offense, and the need to protect the

public. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d

904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular

case is for the discretion of the district court.”).

       AFFIRMED.

                                           2                                     23-398