United States v. Robert Ahenakew
This text of 530 F. App'x 624 (United States v. Robert Ahenakew) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Robert Donald Ahenakew appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 41-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for burglary, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1153(a); and Mont.Code Ann. § 45-6-204(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Ahenakew contends that the district court erred by imposing a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2B2.1(b)(4) because it was not reasonably foreseeable that Ahenakew’s codefendant would possess a dangerous weapon. We review for clear error a district court’s determination that acts by others were reasonably foreseeable for purpose of imposing a dangerous weapon enhancement, see United States v. Lavender, 224 F.3d 939, 941-42 (9th Cir.2000), and find none. The record, which indicated that Ahenakew knew that his codefendant always carried a knife, supports the district court’s conclusion that it was reasonably foreseeable that Ahenakew’s codefendant would possess a knife at the time of the burglary. See Lavender, 224 F.3d at 942; U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
530 F. App'x 624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-robert-ahenakew-ca9-2013.