Gomez-Lepe
United States v. Gomez-Lepe
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Isidro Gomez-Lepe appeals his jury conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 846, and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . We affirm.
I. The Cisneros Testimony
Gomez-Lepe first claims that the district court erred when it allowed the government to question Cisneros regarding the contents of a previously written statement. However, this statement was not admitted for impeachment purposes or otherwise. No error occurred because the district court sustained Gomez-Lepe’s objection to the introduction of this statement.
As for the introduction of Cisneros’ guilty plea, we agree with both parties that this evidence was admitted in error. Considering the other evidence presented against Gomez-Lepe as well as the limiting instruction given to the jury regarding use of prior convictions, any error in admitting the plea was harmless and does *667 not require reversal in this case. See United States v. Mett, 178 F.3d 1058, 1066 (9th Cir.1999) (error is harmless when there is a “fair assurance” that the judgment was not substantially swayed by the error).