Petrushkin

United States v. Petrushkin

Good Law
142 F.4th 1241
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 14, 202523-572California4,475 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Randy Holmes told a confidential informant for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) that he needed a gun to conduct a robbery, and ATF set up a sting firearm transaction at a Motel 6 in Spokane on November 5, 2021. Holmes drove to the Motel 6 with William Burns and Vincent Petrushkin (the defendant here). Petrushkin believed that they would rob someone at the Motel 6 but did not know about Holmes’s plan to obtain a gun to conduct future robberies. At the Motel 6, Holmes told Burns and Petrushkin that he was “gonna do this by myself homie” and rejected their offers of help. Burns then gave Holmes a Glock Model 17 9mm semi-automatic handgun. After Burns transferred the gun to Holmes, Petrushkin asked if he could see the gun. Petrushkin “held the gun, looked at it and said hell yeah,” handed the gun back to Holmes, and got into the backseat of the car. Petrushkin possessed the gun for approximately five seconds. Holmes then entered the undercover ATF agent’s car, pointed the Glock at the agent’s head, and demanded a firearm. When the agent told him it was in the back of the car, Holmes exited the vehicle to locate the firearm. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.