United States v. Steven Craig Hildenbrand

960 F.2d 153 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Steven Craig HILDENBRAND, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10227. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 11, 1991. Decided April 17, 1992. Before HUG, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Steven Hildenbrand appeals his convictions for conspiracy to import marijuana and for aiding and abetting the illegal importation of marijuana. He cites as error the trial court's admission of Rule 404(b) other act evidence and alleges the evidence was insufficient to convict him. 3 * The trial court admitted evidence of marijuana found in Hildenbrand's house to show his knowledge that the substance imported in the package mailed from the Philippines was marijuana. The question of his knowing participation in the importing of a controlled substance is an element of a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 960 . United States v.…