United States of America v. Taray Lavale David

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TARAY LAVALE DAVID,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-30176
D.C. No. 2:17-cr-00004-RSM-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ricardo S. Martinez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 19, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Taray Lavale David appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). 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
AUG 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-30176
David contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to
consider or address his arguments regarding the mitigating impact of his mental
illness. The district court did not plainly err. See United States v. Valencia-
Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010). The court expressly considered
David’s mitigating arguments and explained that the above-Guidelines sentence
was warranted in light of David’s repeated firearm possession offenses, his
aggravated criminal history, and the need to protect the public. See United States
v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
David also contends that the above-Guidelines sentence is substantively
unreasonable in light of his mental illness and difficult childhood. The district
court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51
(2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall, 552
U.S. at 51; see also United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir.
2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the
discretion of the district court.”)
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --