United States v. Wilford Frank Montgomery

988 F.2d 124 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Wilford Frank MONTGOMERY, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10317. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 11, 1993. * Decided Feb. 18, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California; No. CR-90-00091-02-OW, Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding. E.D.Cal. AFFIRMED. Before GOODWIN, SCHROEDER and CANBY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Wilford Frank Montgomery appeals his conviction, following a jury trial, for making a false statement to the government in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 . Montgomery argues that the district court erred by excluding evidence regarding his knowledge of the capacity in which he made the statement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 3 We review the district court's decisions regarding the relevancy of evidence for abuse of discretion. United…