United States v. Orlando Tom

961 F.2d 217 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Orlando TOM, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10352. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 20, 1992. * Decided April 28, 1992. Before FARRIS, O'SCANNLAIN and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Orlando Tom appeals his convictions, following a jury trial, of four counts of aggravated sexual abuse of a minor under the age of twelve in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 2241(c). Tom contends that the district court erred by denying his motion for directed verdict on three of the four counts because those counts were part of one continuous act of sexual abuse which merged into one count of the indictment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 3 We review de novo a district court's determination that charges are not multiplicitous. United States v. Mayberry, 913 F.2d 719, 724 (9th Cir.1990). 4 "[M]ultiplicity…