Jaramillo

Guillermo JaramiUo appeals his conviction for making false declarations under 18 U.S.C. § 1623 (c). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse.

I

Standard of Review

The district court’s statutory interpretation is reviewed de novo. United States v. Polizzi 801 F.2d 1543, 1547 (9th Cir.1986). A district court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Schmidt, 573 F.2d 1057, 1066 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 881 , 99 S.Ct. 221 , 58 L.Ed.2d 194 (1978).

II

Background

Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) agents approached AppeUant Gufllermo Jar-amiUo to request his assistance in their investigation of drug trafficking activities by one Jose Garcia. JaramiUo signed an agreement to become a confidential informant.

Throughout the Garcia investigation, Jar-amUlo insisted that he did not want to testify at trial. The DEA agents, however, told JaramUlo that they might call him as a witness.

Twice, at meetings in the U.S. Attorney’s office, DEA agents served JaramiUo with grand jury subpoenas. He balked both times. The government and JaramiUo then reached a compromise whereby JaramUlo agreed to furnish a witness statement for the Government…