who was McClain’s girlfriend at the time. The informant initially alerted law
enforcement that McClain and two friends were planning to rob a house that was
known to have marijuana and cash. Based on subsequent indications from the
informant that McClain had a gun and was moving forward with the plan, law
enforcement arrested McClain for possession of the gun. On appeal, McClain
contends that the district court abused its discretion by allowing evidence of the
robbery plan at trial and by enhancing his sentence on the ground that he planned
to use the gun to commit the robbery. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C.
§ 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
“[T]he district court’s admission of evidence is reviewed for an abuse of
discretion.” United States v. Hernandez, 109 F.3d 1450, 1452 (9th Cir. 1997) (per
curiam). The district court’s application of the sentencing guidelines to the facts is
reviewed for an abuse of discretion, and its findings of fact in support of the
sentence are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Garner, 490 F.3d 739, 742
(9th Cir. 2007).
1. McClain contends that the district court abused its discretion by allowing
evidence of the robbery plan at trial, over his objection, because there was
The parties are familiar with the facts, and we repeat them here only
as necessary to explain our decision.