USA v. William Mahan, No. 08-30475 (9th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 16 2009 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 08-30475 D.C. No. 6:06-CR-60045-AA v. MEMORANDUM * WILLIAM JOHN MAHAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Ann L. Aiken, Chief District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted October 6, 2009 Portland, Oregon Before: O SCANNLAIN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and WOLLE,** Senior District Judge. William Mahan appeals his sentence arising from a conviction for three offenses related to his firearm possession and drug trafficking activities. The facts * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, sitting by designation. are known to the parties and need not be repeated here, except as necessary to explain our decision.1 Mahan challenges the district court s determination that a drug purchase occurring roughly a month before the drug transaction that led to his conviction was relevant conduct for sentencing purposes. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.3. Specifically, Mahan argues that the two transactions were not part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction. Id. § 1B1.3(a)(2). Mahan s two drug transactions occurred within less than a month. Both were drug sales, and both transactions involved the same type of drug, methamphetamine. Given the similarity and proximity of these two transactions, we do not believe the district court s determination that they were part of the same course of conduct was clearly erroneous. Therefore, the district court s sentencing decision is AFFIRMED. 1 Mahan s claim that he did not possess firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense by receiving guns in exchange for drugs is addressed in an opinion filed concurrently with this memorandum disposition. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
