Hollingsworth

MEMORANDUM *

Dwight Hollingsworth (“Hollingsworth”) appeals his jury conviction of one count of importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 , 960, and one count of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We affirm. Because the parties are famil *179 iar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we will not recount it here.

Evidence of poverty is inadmissible to prove motive. United States v. Romero-Avila, 210 F.3d 1017, 1022 (9th Cir.2000). Contrary to Hollingsworth’s contention, a review of the record shows that the government did not use the evidence of Hollingsworth’s unemployment to argue impermissibly, or even imply, that Hollingsowrth was poor and thus had motive to commit the crime. Therefore, the district court did not err by admitting evidence of Hollingsworth’s unemployment.

A prosecutor’s cross-examination or comments highlighting the weaknesses in the defendant’s case do not shift the burden to the defendant so long as: (1) the comments do not call attention to the defendant’s failure to testify; (2) the prosecutor does not argue that failure to explain the weaknesses requires a guilty…