United States of America v. Glen Ray Briggs

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GLEN RAY BRIGGS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Nos. 11-30382
11-30383
11-30384
11-30385
D.C. Nos. 2:07-cr-02065-LRS
2:07-cr-02063-LRS
2:07-cr-02114-LRS
2:07-cr-02066-LRS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 9, 2012**
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
FILED
OCT 17 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-30382, 11-30383, 11-30384, 11-30385 2
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.

-- 2 of 2 --