Cornelia

United States v. Cornelia

Good Law
48 F. App'x 631
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 8, 2002No. 00-50657; D.C. No. CR-99-03588-HBTCalifornia766 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Cornelia was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to import MDMA. 1 She now appeals the district court’s denial of her motion for a new trial on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct, the district court’s evidentiary rulings, the denial of her Jenck’s Act motion, and the district court’s decision not to give jury instructions proposed by Cornelia.

Prosecutorial Misconduct

Cornelia asserts that the prosecutor’s opening statement, telling the jury that Cornelia refused a government agent’s request for consent to search an apartment she shared with co-defendant Jamie Rhines (“Rhines”), and the prosecutor’s statement to the defense attorney in the jury’s presence that Cornelia should “plead” constituted prosecutorial misconduct.

Reversal of a conviction is required only if the alleged prosecutorial misconduct actually deprived Cornelia of a fair trial. United States v. Yarbrough, 852 F.2d 1522, 1539 (9th Cir.1988). Any prejudicial effect of the prosecutor’s opening statement that Cornelia refused to give government agents consent to search the apartment was neutralized by the court’s curative instructions. See United States v. Crenshaw, 698 F.2d 1060, 1063 (9th…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.