United States v. Clint Registe

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 14 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-30042 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:18-cr-00140-TMB-MMS-1 v. CLINT REGISTE, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 22, 2026** Before: LEE, DESAI, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.

Clint Registe appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for being a felon in possession of firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The request for oral argument is denied.

Registe first contends that the district court erred under U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(c) by declining to run his federal sentence concurrent to his then prospective state sentence. However, the court did not abuse its “broad discretion” by determining that a consecutive, statutory maximum sentence was warranted under the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, including the need to protect the public and Registe’s substantial criminal history involving violence and firearms. See United States v. Shouse, 755 F.3d 1104, 1108-09 (9th Cir. 2014).

Registe next contends that § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment. This claim is foreclosed. See United States v. Duarte, 137 F.4th 743, 761 (9th Cir. 2025) (en banc) (rejecting constitutional challenge to § 922(g)(1)’s categorical disarmament of felons), cert. denied, __ S. Ct. __, 2026 WL 135692 (U.S. Jan. 20, 2026).

AFFIRMED.

2 20-30042