Pai

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant-Appellant Bradley Dean Mahina Pai (“Pai”) was convicted of one count of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon, 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(1) and 924(a)(2). He appeals the district court’s strike of his motion to suppress, exclusion of trial witnesses, and imposition of supervised release, a condition of which prohibits the use of controlled substances, including medicinal marijuana. We affirm.

I. Appeal of Pre-trial Motions

Pai entered a plea after losing two pre-trial rulings: the district court granted the government’s motion to strike Pai’s motion to suppress evidence obtained in a search and granted the government’s in limine motion to exclude testimony as irrelevant to the crime charged.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(a)(2) provides that:

*721 Pai acknowledges that his plea was unconditional. Because he did not obtain the consent of the court or government to enter a conditional plea, or specify in writing the issues he sought to appeal, he is precluded from appealing the two challenged district court rulings.

II. Imposition of Supervised Release

Pai argues that supervised release is unnecessary and that the district court’s imposition…