United States of America v. Kevin Quoc Tran

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
KEVIN QUOC TRAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-50302
D.C. No. 8:15-cr-00114-TJH-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Terry J. Hatter, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 21, 2019**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.
Kevin Quoc Tran appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
the sentence of one year and one day imposed following his guilty-plea conviction
for being a prohibited person in possession of firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)(9). 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).
FILED
MAY 23 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-50302
Tran argues that the district court failed to explain adequately its rejection of
his argument for a base offense level of six pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(2),
and imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence. However, the record reflects
that the district court sufficiently explained its determination that, because Tran
had failed to show that he possessed the firearms solely for lawful sporting
purposes or collection and had not unlawfully discharged or otherwise used them,
U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(2) was inapplicable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d
984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Moreover, the sentence of one year and one
day is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing
factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
38, 51 (2007).
Given our decision on the merits, we do not reach the validity of the appeal
waiver in the parties’ plea agreement. See United States v. Jacobo Castillo, 496
F.3d 947, 957 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (appeal waiver is not jurisdictional).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --