United States v. Juan Muro-Inclain

MEMORANDUM

Juan Muro-Inclain (“Muro”) appeals his conviction after a jury trial for conspiracy to commit second-degree murder in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1117 , and denial of a two-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 3El.l(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Muro raises a number of evidentiary objections on appeal. At trial, he did not raise any of these objections; nor did he argue for a reduction in his Guidelines range for acceptance of responsibility at sentencing. We therefore review all of Muro’s challenges for plain error. Fed. R.Crim.P. 52(b); see also United States v. Godson, 763 F.3d 1189, 1203 (9th Cir.2014); United States v. Rodriguez-Lara, 421 F.3d 932, 948 (9th Cir.2005), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Hernandez-Estrada, 749 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir.2014).

1. The district court did not plainly err in admitting correctional officer Fee-ney’s expert testimony that, “[w]hen an inmate steps into that sally port with that guard, those other inmates are automatically assuming the worst, that he’s checking in.” Officer Feeney did not comment on whether Muro had…