Rushwam

MEMORANDUM **

Gary Rushwam appeals his jury conviction and sentence of 188 months for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the conviction and sentence.

We review de novo whether a defendant’s Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendment rights were violated. United States v. Van Poyck, 77 F.3d 285, 290 (9th Cir.1996) (Fourth Amendment); United States v. Hernandez, 476 F.3d 791, 796 (9th Cir. 2007) (Fifth Amendment); United States v. Ortega, 208 F.3d 675, 679 (9th Cir.2000) (Sixth Amendment).

We reject Rushwam’s argument that the district court’s admission of recorded telephone calls that Rushwam made from jail constituted a Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendment violation. Rushwam had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the outbound calls he made from jail, Van Poyck, 77 F.3d at 291 , and the recorded conversations were not the result of a government-initiated interrogation. Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291, 300-01 , 100 S.Ct. 1682 , 64 L.Ed.2d 297 (1980); Ortega, 203 F.3d at 680.

We review de novo a district court’s rulings on a motion to suppress and the…