MEMORANDUM **

Scott H. Summerhays appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and aggregate 234-month sentence for wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343; money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957; and identity theft and aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1028(a)(7) and 1028A We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Summerhays, who chose to represent himself, contends that he received ineffective assistance from his standby counsel. Assuming without deciding that Summer-hays can assert an ineffective assistance claim against his standby counsel, we decline to consider this claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011) (this court reviews ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal only where the record is sufficiently developed or inadequate representation is obvious).

Summerhays next contends that the 234-month sentence is substantively unreasonable. The district court , did not abuse its discretion in imposing Summerhay’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). The low-end Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the sophistication of Summerhays’s scheme and the loss amount. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586.

AFFIRMED.