United States v. Geoffrey Schardien

Good Law
499 F. App'x 717
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 3, 201211-30286California516 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Geoffrey Peter Schardien appeals from the district court’s judgment of conviction for conspiracy to possess, possession with intent to distribute, and distribution of 500 grams of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). He alleges the trial court erred in denying his counsel the right to cross-examine a cooperating witness about the fact that he received a mandatory minimum sentence, and in denying his motion for a mistrial following alleged prosecutorial misconduct. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

We review for abuse of discretion both issues: (1) a trial court’s limitation on the scope of cross-examination, United States v. Larson, 495 F.3d 1094, 1101 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc), and (2) a claim of prose-cutorial misconduct raised at trial, United States v. Sarkisian, 197 F.3d 966, 988 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

I

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right of a criminal defendant “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” U.S. Const, amend. VI. The “essential purpose” of the right is to secure the opportunity for cross-examination. Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 678 , 106 S.Ct. 1431 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986). Three factors…

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.