United States v. Floro Cauton

99 F.3d 1147 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Floro CAUTON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-10553. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 7, 1996. Decided Oct. 18, 1996. Before: WALLACE, HALL, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Floro Cauton appeals from his convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and methamphetamine and conspiracy to launder money. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 * Cauton contends the government did not prove a single overall conspiracy to distribute cocaine and methamphetamine as alleged in count 1 of the fourth superseding indictment, but instead proved two separate conspiracies--one to distribute cocaine and another to distribute methamphetamine--which resulted in a prejudicial variance between the indictment and the proof at trial. Cauton argues in the alternative that even if the evidence presented at trial…