United States v. Michael Navarro

MEMORANDUM

Appellant-Defendant Michael Navarro (“Navarro”) appeals his jury conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). He contends that he was prejudiced by two evi-dentiary errors at trial and that the district court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal.

Navarro first argues that pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rules 403 and 404(b), the district court should have excluded testimony about why law enforcement stopped him on the street, because this was inadmissible “other act” evidence. Such evidence, however, may be admitted without regard to Rule 404(b) so long as it is necessary “to permit the prosecutor to offer a coherent and comprehensible story regarding the commission of the crime.” United States v. Vizcarra-Martinez, 66 F.3d 1006, 1012-13 (9th Cir.1995). Here, the challenged testimony was inextricably intertwined with Navarro’s arrest and provided the context in which the charged crime occurred. See United States v. Collins, 90 F.3d 1420, 1428-29 (9th Cir.1996). Thus, the district court did not err in admitting this testimony. See United States v. DeGeorge, 380 F.3d 1203, 1220 (9th…