Howell

MEMORANDUM **

Joel Antonio Howell appeals his jury conviction for being in possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We affirm.

As the parties are already familiar with the facts of Howell’s arrest and conviction, we recount them only as necessary to our disposition.

I

We review the district court’s decision to deny Howell’s motions to suppress de novo, United States v. Crawford, 372 F.3d 1048, 1053 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc), and conclude that the district court did not err.

Howell admitted possession of the firearms over eight hours after he returned from drinking, and the evidence was that he was, at most, “a little tipsy.” The record indicates that Howell was not pressured, intimidated, or coerced, and that he demonstrated the ability to lucidly answer questions from his friend and from the officers. The totality of the circumstances suggests that Howell’s admission was “the product of a rational intellect and a free will.” United States v. Banks, 282 F.3d 699, 706 (9th Cir.2002) (citation and quotation marks omitted), rev’d on other grounds, 540 U.S. 31…