United States v. Mitchell

── United States v. Mitchell ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Date: April 08, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 8 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-1619 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 2:21-cr-00156-JCM-MDC-1 v. MEMORANDUM* TREVION DARNELL MITCHELL, AKA Tavion Mitchell, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 2, 2025 San Francisco, California Before: R. NELSON, COLLINS, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges. Defendant-Appellant Trevion Mitchell is a serial domestic abuser and felon who possessed a handgun while kidnapping and repeatedly beating the mother of his children. Mitchell pled guilty to possessing a firearm as a prohibited person, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), (9), and the district court imposed a * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. within-Guidelines sentence of 120 months’ imprisonment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). We affirm. We review a district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines and whether a sentence violates a defendant’s constitutional rights de novo. United States v. Parlor, 2 F.4th 807, 811 (9th Cir. 2021); United States v. Barlow, 83 F.4th 773, 779 (9th Cir. 2023). We review the district court’s application of the Guidelines to the facts for abuse of discretion. Parlor, 2 F.4th at 811. On appeal, Mitchell claims that the court misapplied the United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG), violated his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, and procedurally erred. Because Mitchell’s counsel withdrew the argument that he did not knowingly and voluntarily plead guilty, we address only Mitchell’s remaining arguments. All of them fail. 1. The district court correctly applied the enhancement for possessing a firearm “in connection with another felony offense” under USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (2023). To establish this enhancement, the Government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that “the firearm was possessed in a manner that permits an inference that it facilitated or potentially facilitated—i.e., had some potential emboldening role in—a defendant’s felonious conduct.” United States v. Gonzales, 506 F.3d 940, 947 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (citation omitted). 2 24-1619  On possession, Mitchell is incorrect that “mere constructive possession is insufficient” to apply § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). See United States v. Ellis, 241 F.3d 1096, 1099–100 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Cazares, 121 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 1997). Police located the loaded handgun on a closet shelf next to “paperwork belonging to Mitchell along with various other personal effects indicating that Mitchell reside[d] within the bedroom where the firearm was located.” Mitchell’s constructive possession of the firearm—as evidenced by its “close proximity” to him in the closet and the victim’s corroborated testimony—was sufficient to apply the enhancement. USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), cmt. n.14(B). On facilitation, the victim described to 911 dispatchers, and later to police and a Nevada grand jury, how Mitchell threatened to shoot her with the gun if she did not come back after she fled the apartment. Mitchell’s threa