Lua

MEMORANDUM

Javier Manzo Lua appeals his jury conviction of conspiracy to manufacture and possess with intent to distribute marijuana, possess cocaine with intent to distribute, and distribute methamphetamine. Lua asserts two errors: first, that the district court erred in allowing special agent Isaías Rivera to testify both as an expert and as a lay witness; and second, that there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction for conspiracy. We affirm.

Dual Testimony

We review failure by the district court to instruct as to the dual nature of expert and lay testimony from a single witness for plain error where, as here, the defendant fails to object to the dual nature of the testimony at trial. United States v. Freeman, 498 F.3d 893, 904 (9th Cir.2007). Consistent with our precedent, the district court’s failure to provide such an instruction here does not amount to plain error because the line between expert and lay testimony is a fine one, particularly where the witness is qualified to testify both as an expert and as a lay witness. Id.

A special agent may testify both as an expert witness with regards to coded conversations and as a lay witness with regard to both…