United States v. Rima

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: March 28, 2025
• Docket: 24-5702
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 28 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-5702 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 3:23-cr-05070-BHS-1 v. MEMORANDUM* ROY ANTHONY RIMA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 26, 2025** Seattle, Washington

Before: McKEOWN, GOULD, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Roy Anthony Rima appeals from his sentence for unlawful possession of a

firearm, mail theft, and possession of stolen mail. As the parties are familiar with

the facts, we do not recount them here. “We review the district court’s

interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo, its application of the

* 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). Guidelines to the facts of the case for abuse of discretion, and its factual findings

for clear error.” United States v. Barlow, 83 F.4th 773, 780 (9th Cir. 2023)

(citation and internal quotation marks omitted). We affirm.

To establish a sentence enhancement under United States Sentencing

Guidelines § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), the government “must show that the firearm was

possessed in a manner that permits an inference that it facilitated or potentially

facilitated—i.e., had some potential emboldening role in—a defendant’s felonious

conduct.” United States v. Gonzales, 506 F.3d 940, 947 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc)

(citation omitted); see also id. at 946 n.4.

Here, the undisputed facts show Rima possessed a loaded revolver. Rima

took the revolver with him when he stole mail. He kept the loaded revolver within

arm’s reach—his waistband. The presence of the revolver was not an “accident or

coincidence.” United States v. Ellis, 241 F.3d 1096, 1100 (9th Cir. 2001).

Based on these facts, the district court agreed with the probation officer’s

recommendation and found that the § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement applied

because Rima’s possession of the firearm had “potential for facilitating” the mail

theft and possession of stolen mail. See Gonzales, 506 F.3d at 947; cf. United

States v. Grimaldo, 993 F.3d 1077, 1083 (9th Cir. 2021) (concluding “the

government failed to prove that possessing a gun emboldened [the defendant’s]

possession of narcotics” because “the district court never found that [he] used his

2 24-5702 firearm for such a purpose”). That finding is not clearly erroneous. See, e.g.,

United States v. Valenzuela, 495 F.3d 1127, 1135 (9th Cir. 2007) (concluding “the

district court could reasonably find that the shotgun emboldened [the defendant’s]

possession of the stolen property” based on the shotgun’s “location”—“within

ready reach”).

AFFIRMED.

3 24-5702