United States of America v. Wilson Lee Clow

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
WILSON LEE CLOW,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-30111
D.C. No. 6:12-cr-00638-AA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Ann L. Aiken, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Wilson Lee Clow appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
the 24-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial convictions for selling
firearms to a prohibited person, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), and false
statements during the sale of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A).
* 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).
FILED
MAY 17 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-30111
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Clow contends his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the
district court focused too heavily on punishment and ignored his history of public
service and other mitigating circumstances. He also suggests that the Guidelines
range was unfairly inflated based on his decision to go to trial. The district court
did not abuse its discretion in imposing Clow’s sentence. See Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Contrary to Clow’s argument, the court took
explicit account of Clow’s history of service, and community and family ties. The
court also acknowledged Clow’s medical problems. It did not punish Clow’s
decision to go to trial, but rather reasonably treated Clow’s decision to perjure
himself at trial, in combination with his decision to threaten one of the
government’s witnesses, as aggravating factors. In light of the totality of the
circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the below-
Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --