LAW.coLAW.co

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Max Joseph PLOG-HOROWITZ, Defendant-Appellant

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit2015-04-10No. Nos. 14-10059, 14-10060
599 F. App'x 742

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated appeals, Max Joseph Plog-Horowitz appeals from the district court’s judgments and challenges the 60-month sentence imposed following his revocation of probation and 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.

Plog-Horowitz contends that the district court improperly imposed a four-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). He argues that there was insufficient evidence that he possessed the firearm in connection with the felony of impersonating a federal officer. We review for clear error. See United States v. Flores, 729 F.3d 910, 913 (9th Cir.2013). The pistol that Plog-Horowitz was convicted of possessing was found loaded and holstered along with law enforcement credentials, clothing, and other weapons. In light of this and Plog-Horowitz’s history of impersonating a federal officer, the district court did not clearly err in finding that Plog-Horowitz intended to use or possess the firearm in connection with the offense ,of impersonating a federal officer. See United States v. Jimison, 493 F.3d 1148, 1149 (9th Cir.2007). In any event, the district court also found that Plog-Horo-witz intended to possess or use the gun in connection with the felony offense of conspiracy to commit insurance fraud and Plog-Horowitz does not challenge that finding on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.