Klatter

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant Nancy Klatter appeals her conviction for several counts of mail fraud and several counts of wire fraud. Defendant was a telephone salesperson at Gecko Holdings, Inc. (Gecko), a fraudulent telephone-marketing company. She argues that the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of a search conducted at the offices of FTF, one of her previous employers. She also contends that the district court improperly instructed the jury on co-schemer liability. Finally, she argues that the prosecutor’s closing argument was improper and requires reversal.

Evidence of “other acts” is admissible to demonstrate intent or knowledge. Fed. R.Evid. 404(b). The district court enjoys wide discretion in whether to admit such evidence. United States v. Blitz, 151 F.3d 1002, 1007 (9th Cir.1998). Here, the court admitted the evidence only after Defendant testified that she had previously been employed by FTF, a similar business doing similar work, and that nothing about Gecko raised a “red flag.” At that point, the government was permitted to question Defendant about the search warrant executed on FTF. We find no abuse of discretion. See Blitz, 151 F.3d at 1008-09…