Opinion
No. 11-30382 No. 11-30383 No. 11-30384 No. 11-30385 D.C. No. 2:07-cr-02065-LRS D.C. No. 2:07-cr-02063-LRS D.C. No. 2:07-cr-02114-LRS D.C. No. 2:07-cr-02066-LRS
10-17-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GLEN RAY BRIGGS, Defendant - Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, District Judge, Presiding
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Glen Ray Briggs appeals from the 240-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea convictions for various drug, firearm and escape offenses. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Briggs contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because his Guidelines sentencing range was based on a fictional amount of drugs, and because the sentence is greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of sentencing. The district court considered Briggs's mitigation arguments, including his contentions regarding the fictional nature of the drugs, in imposing a below-Guidelines sentence. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.