United States v. Eduardo Ocegueda-Ruiz

Good Law
663 F. App'x 560
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 17, 201615-30158California1,255 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Eduardo Ocegueda-Ruiz appeals his jury convictions and sentences for drug and firearm offenses. We affirm.

1. On de novo review, the district court did not err in failing to give the jury a multiple conspiracies instruction that had no foundation in the evidence. A multiple conspiracies instruction is warranted where a jury could reasonably interpret the evidence presented at trial to show separate conspiracies and there is a risk that the defendant may be convicted on the basis of acts committed by those in a conspiracy of which he was not a part. See United States v. Moe, 781 F.3d 1120, 1127 (9th Cir. 2015), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 342 , 193 L.Ed.2d 246 (2015); United States v. Anguiano, 873 F.2d 1314, 1317-18 (9th Cir. 1989). The risks associated with multiple conspiracies are generally absent where a defendant is tried alone. See Anguiano, 873 F.2d at 1318 .

The fact that Ocegueda-Ruiz was tried alone tends to negate the risks that would be present if the proof showed multiple conspiracies. Further, the proof clearly shows only a single conspiracy. Ocegueda-Ruiz admits that the United States presented evidence at trial of a “conspiracy involving…

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.