United States v. Jae Shik Cha

97 F.3d 1462 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jae Shik CHA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-30206. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 6, 1996. Decided Sept. 16, 1996. Before: WRIGHT, BEEZER, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Defendant Jae Shik Cha appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine ("ice") and money laundering. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm. I. Rule 404(b) "Other Acts" Evidence 3 Cha argues that the district court improperly admitted evidence of prior bad acts which should have been excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b). Evidence is not considered Rule 404(b) "other crimes" evidence if it is "inextricably intertwined" with the crime charged. United States v. Ramirez-Jiminez, 967 F.2d 1321, 1327 (9th Cir.1992). We review de novo whether evidence falls…