Oropeza

MEMORANDUM *

Enrique Oropeza was arrested after his wife called the police claiming he had threatened her with a handgun. He pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion. On appeal, Oropeza argues that (1) the district court erred in finding that exigent circumstances justified the seizure of the shotgun, and (2) the district court erred in imposing alcohol abstention as a condition of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 8742. We do not recount the facts here except as necessary to our disposition in this case.

The district court found that Officer Van Meter’s seizure of the shotgun in the Or-opezas’ closet was justified by exigent circumstances. “In reviewing decisions of the district court, we may affirm on any ground finding support in the record. If the decision below is correct, it must be affirmed, even if the district court relied on the wrong grounds or wrong reasoning.” Cigna Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Polaris Pictures Corp., 159 F.3d 412, 418 (9th Cir.1998) (internal quotation marks omitted). We affirm the…