United States v. Chauncey Ransom

990 F.2d 1264 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Chauncey RANSOM, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50102. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 23, 1993. * Decided April 6, 1993. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and FARRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Chauncey Ransom appeals the district court's denial of his motion for a new trial following his jury trial conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (1988). Ransom argues that a new trial should be ordered because newly discovered evidence demonstrates that a government witness committed perjury at trial. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988). We affirm. 3 Ransom alleges that Andrew Chambers, who testified on the government's behalf, perjured himself when he denied having been arrested for a drug-related crime. Ransom's trial attorney "discovered" the…