Quiroz

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant Rafael Quiroz was convicted of continuing criminal enterprise, 21 U.S.C. § 848 , conspiracy to manufacture, distribute, and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846, and with manufacturing of methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). He now appeals.

Quiroz first argues that the prosecutor impermissibly vouched for the credibility of Ernesto Planearte. Government lawyers are prohibited from vouching for the veracity and credibility of their witnesses. Vouching may occur either when the prosecution places the prestige of the government behind the witness or implies that the prosecutor has outside knowledge supporting the witness’s testimony. United States v. Roberts, 618 F.2d 530, 533 (9th Cir.1980). In determining whether a prosecutor has impermissibly vouched for a *62 witness the court should consider all circumstances of the trial, United States v. Rudberg, 122 F.3d 1199, 1205 (9th Cir.1997), and has been instructed to look at the factors in United States v. Necoechea, 986 F.2d 1273, 1278 (9th Cir.1993). Quiroz’s counsel did not make any objections at trial, so this panel reviews the record for plain error. United…