United States v. Michael Salas

Good Law
669 F. App'x 449
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 4, 201615-50359California278 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Michael Eric Salas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his jury-trial conviction for assault on a federal officer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 (a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Salas claims that the prosecutor committed two instances of misconduct during closing arguments. First, he contends that the prosecutor improperly disparaged defense counsel by stating that the defense’s focus on the sequence of events surrounding the incident was “the classic lawyer thing” designed to “muddy up the water” and show the jury a “red herring.” We review for harmless error, see United States v. Ruiz, 710 F.3d 1077, 1082 (9th Cir. 2013), and find none. The prosecutor’s comments properly “attacked the strength of the defense on the merits, not the integrity of defense counsel.” United States v. Nobari, 574 F.3d 1065, 1079 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal quotations omitted). Second, Salas contends that the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of the Border Patrol agents by stating that they acted “quite logically” and “wisely” during their interaction with Salas. We review for plain error, see Ruiz, 710 F.3d at 1082 ,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.