United States v. Freddie Bernal
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Freddie Michael Bernal appeals his jury conviction and sentence for willful injury or depredation of property of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1361 and false statement of material fact in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence that Bernal damaged Nez Perce pictographs when he spray painted rocks on federal government land. As the district court found, the evidence of pictograph damage was highly probative for two elements of the offense under § 1361 — the nature of the damage and the cost of the damage — and was not unduly prejudicial. See United States v. Ganoe, 538 F.3d 1117, 1124 (9th Cir.2008) (holding that the probative value of the evidence is high where it is “not extrinsic to the crime charged” but instead directly related to the offense). Further, the district court did not commit plain error in failing to exclude, sua sponte, the testimony of Julia Altman and other witnesses whom Appellant purports have testified “cloaked with the mantle of an expert.” See Jinro America Inc. v. Secure…