United States v. Daniel Lucas Ramo

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Daniel Lucas RAMO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-10467. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 15, 1992. Filed Feb. 21, 1992. Decided May 1, 1992. Before GOODWIN, FLETCHER and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Daniel Lucas Ramo appeals his conviction for possession and distribution of crystal methamphetamine, contending that he was entrapped and that the evidence was insufficient to convict. We affirm. A. Sufficiency of the Evidence 3 There was sufficient evidence to convict Ramo. Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 17 (1978). Officer Pascual testified that he purchased crystal methamphetamine from Ramo on three separate occasions, that Ramo indicated a willingness to engage in repeated methamphetamine transactions, that Ramo was familiar with prevailing market conditions for methamphetamine and negotiated over the price of…