Ramos

MEMORANDUM **

William S. Ramos appeals from the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

On appeal, Ramos makes three contentions regarding the district court’s imposition of a 2-level increase in the offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(4), on the ground that the firearm was stolen. First, Ramos contends that the district court violated his Sixth Amendment rights by finding the facts to impose the increase. Here, because the district court’s factual findings did not increase the statutory maximum sentence and because the district court applied the advisory Guidelines, we conclude that the district court did not violate Ramos’ Sixth Amendment rights. See United States v. Fifield, 432 F.3d 1056, 1066 (9th Cir.2005).

Second, Ramos contends that the increase was improper because the evidence that the firearm was stolen was unreliable hearsay. This court has held that hearsay is admissible at sentencing so long as it is accompanied by some minimal indicia of reliability. See United States v.…