Salazar

United States v. Salazar

Good Law
64 F. App'x 97
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 2003Nos. 02-10145, 02-10185, 02-10391; D.C. No. CR-00-00184-HGCalifornia359 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendants Raquel Salazar-Salazar, Jesus Mojardin, and Miguel Gaytan-Perez raise seven distinct issues on appeal. Although we consolidated the appeals for the purpose of oral argument, we now consider each appeal separately.

I. Raquel Salazar-Salazar

Salazar-Salazar assigns error to the admission of his 1985 conviction for conspiracy. The court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted a ‘sanitized’ version of the conviction under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b). Nor did the district court abuse its discretion by admitting an out-of-court statement made by Mojardin to a government agent. Salazar’s counsel “opened the door” to the entire statement by referencing particular portions of it during cross examination. Finally, Salazar-Salazar assigns error to the denial of his motion to transfer venue. Again, the court did not abuse its discretion. We affirm the judgment.

II. Jesus Mojardin

During Mojardin’s sentencing hearing, the district court ruled that he was ineligible for a “safety valve” reduction pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2. Under any quantum of evidence standard, the evidence proved that Mojardin carried a firearm in connection with the underlying…

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.