United States v. Al David Lavergne

50 F.3d 17 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Al David LAVERGNE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50285. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 6, 1995. Decided March 23, 1995. 1 Before: SCHROEDER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges, and KING, District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 LaVergne appeals his conviction, after a jury trial, of conspiracy, wire fraud, and mail fraud for his role in the sale of oil well interests to investors. We affirm. 4 LaVergne's claim of Bruton error is based on the prosecutor's closing argument, not the testimony. See Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (1968) (finding a Confrontation Clause violation when a nontestifying codefendant's confession naming the defendant as a participant in the crime was introduced at their joint trial, even though the jury was instructed to consider that confession only against the codefendant). Before the postal inspector…