United States v. Rowland

MEMORANDUM**

George Rowland appeals his guilty plea conviction for one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Rowland contends that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause in light of United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 131 L.Ed.2d 626 (1995), United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 120 S.Ct. 1740, 146 L.Ed.2d 658 (2000) and Jones v. United States, 529 U.S. 848, 120 S.Ct. 1904, 146 L.Ed.2d 902 (2000). We have repeatedly rejected this contention, see United States v. Jones, 231 F.3d 508, 513-15 (9th Cir. 2000), United States v. Davis, 242 F.3d 1162, 1162-63 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied,—U.S.—, 122 S.Ct. 178, 151 L.Ed.2d 123 (2001), and United States v. Rousseau, 257 F.3d 925, 932-33 (9th Cir.), cert. denied,—U.S.—, 122 S.Ct. 503, 151 L.Ed.2d 413 (2001), and do so here. See United States v. Carrasco, 257 F.3d 1045, 1053 (9th Cir.), cert. denied,—U.S. —, 122 S.Ct. 658, 151 L.Ed.2d 574 (2001).1

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

. Rowland’s request for an initial hearing en banc is denied. See Fed. R.App. P. 35(a).