Ramos-Lara

MEMORANDUM *

Roberto-Ramos Lara (“Ramos-Lara”) appeals his conviction for Alien Smuggling in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (a)(1)(A)® and B(iii). Ramos-Lara asserts three claims of error. First, he contends the admission of evidence on cross examination concerning his prior deportation violated Federal Rules of Evidence 402 and 404®). Second, Ramos-Lara alleges that the district court erred in denying his motion for mistrial after the prosecutor’s cross examination implied the existence of prejudicial facts unsupported by evidence. Third, Ramos-Lara asserts that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct during closing argument by arguing facts not in evidence and appealing improperly to the jury’s sympathy. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and AFFIRM.

The district court’s evidentiary rulings during trial are reviewed for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Fuchs, 218 F.3d 957, 964 (9th Cir.2000). We apply this same deferential standard to the district court’s denial of a motion for mistrial based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct. See United States v. Scholl, 166 F.3d 964, 974 (9th Cir.1999). “Where defense counsel objected to acts of alleged…