UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lomondo Mark SCOTT, Defendant-Appellant

Lomondo Mark Scott appeals his jury conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1), possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1), and use of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c).

Scott contends on appeal that: (1) the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence seized at the time of his arrest; (2) the introduction of his prior bad acts was more prejudicial than probative; and (3) that there is insufficient evidence to support his convictions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

I.

Generally, we review a motion to suppress de novo and the trial court’s factual findings for clear error. United States v. Manning, 56 F.3d 1188, 1196 (9th Cir.1995).

Here, one officer knocked on the door and noticed a weapon in Scott’s hand when Scott opened the blinds covering the entrance. The officers wore police jackets and yelled “police” and “warrant” as Scott attempted to close the door. The district court found that the officers announced their authority and purpose respectively by yelling “police” and…