Hanon

MEMORANDUM **

Tehra Hanon appeals her conviction for violations of 36 C.F.R. § 2.32 (a)(1), 36 *377 C.F.R. § 2.32 (a)(2), and 36 C.F.R. § 4.2 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we will not recount it here.

I

The district court correctly determined that the citations did not violate Hanon’s Sixth Amendment rights by failing to inform her of the nature and cause of the charges. “A defendant can be adequately notified of the nature and cause of the accusation against him by means other than the charging document.” Calderon v. Prunty, 59 F.3d 1005, 1009 (9th Cir.1995). See also Morrison v. Estelle, 981 F.2d 425, 427 (9th Cir.1992); Sheppard v. Rees, 909 F.2d 1234 , 1236 n. 2 (9th Cir.1989). Here, the defendant was put on notice of the factual allegations supporting the citations well before trial. Thus, she was able to prepare her defense without being prejudiced or surprised at trial as to the allegations or theories against her. Her Sixth Amendment rights were not infringed.

II

The district court also did not err in determining that the investigatory stop and…