United States v. Yañez-Del Rio

MEMORANDUM *

Alfredo Yañez-Del Rio appeals his jury conviction for conspiracy to transport illegal aliens, transportation of illegal aliens and aiding and abetting in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324 (a)(l)(A)(v)(l) and 1324(a)(l)(A)(ii) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . He argues that the jury instructions erroneously defined “transportation of illegal aliens” as either attempted transportation or completed transportation, two distinct crimes with different elements, thereby allowing the jury to convict him without -unanimously agreeing on the same crime.

“[Federal] Rule [of Criminal Procedure] 30 ... requires that a defendant object with adequate specificity — an objection must state distinctly the matter to which the party objects as well as the grounds of the objection.” United States v. Elias, 269 F.3d 1003, 1017-18 (9th Cir.2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), petition for cert, filed, 70 U.S.L.W. 3656 (Apr. 4, 2002) (No. 01-1502). Because counsel’s objection to the jury instructions did not meet the specificity requirement here, we review only for plain error. See Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373, 388 , 119 S.Ct. 2090 , 144 L.Ed.2d 370 (1999); United States v.…