Branum

United States v. Branum

Good Law
26 F. App'x 618
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 2001No. 01-10142; D.C. No. CR-S-00-185-LDGCalifornia568 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gary Duane Branum (“Branum”) appeals from his conviction by a jury for *619 perjury in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1621 . He argues that he was denied a fair trial because the district court rejected his proffered stipulation and permitted the government to introduce evidence of Branum’s prior felony conviction and imprisonment for delivery of methamphetamine. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.

Branum was not denied a fair trial because the district court properly admitted evidence of his prior conviction, its drug-related nature, and his term of incarceration. This evidence was relevant to prove the elements of perjury. See Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172, 174 , 117 S.Ct. 644 , 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997) (reviewing the district court’s rejection of a proffered stipulation and admission of pri- or felony conviction evidence for an abuse of discretion); Fed.R.Evid. 401, 402. A witness testifying under oath commits perjury under 18 U.S.C. § 1621 if he “gives false testimony concerning a material matter with the willful intent to provide false testimony, rather than as a result of confusion, mistake, or faulty…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.