Manraksa

United States v. Manraksa

Good Law
69 F. App'x 894
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 22, 2003Nos. 02-30174, 02-30175California2,410 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Malee Manraksa (“Manraksa”) appeals her jury conviction for one count of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and for four counts of distribution of methamphetamine. Her co-defendant Charles Stevenson (“Stevenson”) appeals his jury conviction and sentence for one count of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, and one count of distribution of methamphetamine. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a), and we affirm on all counts.

I.

Manraksa first argues that the district court erred by denying her motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 16(a) to discover prior recorded statements implicating her involvement in an uncharged sale of ecstasy pills and then allowing those statements to be introduced at trial in violation of Fed. R.Evid. 404(b). Manraksa also argues that the denial of her discovery requests resulted in the government failing to satisfy its obligations under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). We review evidentiary and discovery rulings for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chon, 210 F.3d 990 , 994 (9th Cir.2000); United States v. Wright, 215 F.3d 1020, 1025 (9th Cir. 2000). We…

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.