United States v. James Essner

James David Essner was convicted, after a bench trial, for threatening a federal officer, and was sentenced to 57 months imprisonment. He appeals his conviction and sentence. We affirm.

Essner contends, first, that the district court improperly considered extrinsic evidence at trial. The district judge listened to two voicemails, both properly introduced into evidence, that Essner had left for pretrial services officer Michael Himelic. He did so in order to compare what Essner sounded like when he apologized, and was therefore likely lucid, with what he sounded like when he made the threatening statement for which he had been criminally charged. The district judge was permitted to make such a comparison, which did not require the consideration of any extrinsic evidence.

The district court also did not abuse its discretion in admitting the expert testimony of pharmacist Robert Wolff. Wolff had the requisite “knowledge, skill, experience, training, [and] education” to testify as to the pharmacological effects of morphine. Fed.R.Evid. 702; see United States v. Smith, 520 F.3d 1097, 1105 (9th Cir.2008). In any event, the district court’s statements in rendering its verdict make…