United States v. Frederick Johnson

MEMORANDUM

Frederick Lim Johnson appeals from the district court’s conviction and imposition of a life sentence. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

I.

“ ‘We review a district court’s finding that a pre-arraignment delay was reasonable for clear error.’ ” United States v. Liera, 585 F.3d 1237, 1242 (9th Cir.2009), quoting United States v. Padilla-Mendoza, 157 F.3d 730, 732 (9th Cir.1998). There was no clear error. Even if there were, in light of the corroborated independent evidence against Johnson, any error regarding the admission of the statements was harmless; therefore, reversal on this ground is inappropriate. See id. at 1244 (“An error is harmless if it is more probable than not that the error did not materially affect the verdict” (internal quotations omitted)); Olivas v. State of Ariz. ex rel. Eyman, 447 F.2d 974, 975-76 (9th Cir. 1971).

II.

We “review de novo whether references to a defendant’s silence violate his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.” United States v. Pino-Noriega, 189 F.3d 1089, 1098 (9th Cir.1999). “[Ujnder our precedent, prosecutorial comments on failure to testify only require reversal ‘where…