United States v. Barry Bowser, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Barry Lee Bowser, Jr., appeals his conviction after a jury trial for aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 39A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. Any error the district court committed in failing to make an explicit threshold determination endorsing Dr. McLin’s credentials to render a reliable opinion is harmless. See Estate of Barabin v. Asten-Johnson, Inc., 740 F.3d 457, 463-64 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). The submissions to the court, Dr. McLin’s testimony, and voir dire by defense counsel at trial demonstrate that Dr. McLin was qualified based on his knowledge and experience to testify about laser strikes on aircraft and the effect of those strikes on vision. See United States v. Hankey, 203 F.3d 1160, 1169 (9th Cir. 2000). Though the district court stated that it would make question-by-question rulings as to Dr. McLin’s testimony, Bowser did not object to Dr. McLin’s testimony that it is necessary to aim a laser at an aircraft in order to hit it. Even if this testimony exceeded the scope of Dr. McLin’s expertise, its admission was not plain error, given the overwhelming evidence of Bowser’s guilt. See…