United States v. Ronald Lee Butterfly Mary Carmalita Butterfly

72 F.3d 136 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Ronald Lee BUTTERFLY; Mary Carmalita Butterfly, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 94-30412, 94-30413. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 11, 1995. Decided Dec. 7, 1995. Before: WRIGHT, ALARCON and CANBY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 We affirm the convictions of Ronald Butterfly ("Ronald") and Mary Carmalita Butterfly ("Carma") for aggravated sexual abuse in connection with the molestation of their four nephews, but we vacate and remand Carma's sentence. Our jurisdiction: 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We discuss below the many issues defendants raised on appeal. A. Ronald's Competence to Stand Trial 3 We consider first whether Ronald was competent to stand trial. We review for clear error the court's decision that he was, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government. United States v. Frank, 956 F.2d 872, 874 (9th…