United States v. Mario Ruiz-Palma

MEMORANDUM

Mario Ruiz-Palma appeals from his conviction following a jury trial for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. The Government concedes error with regard to certain testimony and statements in closing argument that referred to Ruiz-Palma’s post-arrest silence, but it contends such error was harmless. We assume that Ruiz-Palma’s claim of error was preserved but conclude that it is “beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.” Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). The evidence overwhelmingly established Ruiz-Palma’s guilt. Cf. Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 124-25 , 120 S.Ct. 673 , 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000) (unprovoked, headlong flight upon noticing law enforcement suggests wrongdoing); Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366, 373 , 124 S.Ct. 795 , 157 L.Ed.2d 769 (2003) (drug activity in a car is an enterprise to which a guilty person “would be unlikely to admit an innocent person -with the potential to furnish evidence against him”).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.