Melchor-Zaragoza

United States v. Melchor-Zaragoza

Good Law
83 F. App'x 886
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 2003Nos. 02-10314, 02-10638California1,556 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Aquileo Melchor-Zaragoza (“Melchor”) challenges his conviction and sentence. Melchor contends that the district court (1) violated Batson by permitting the prosecutor to exercise a peremptory challenge on the basis of race; (2) denied him a fair trial by admitting prejudicial prior bad acts into evidence; (3) gave the jury improper and misleading Pinkerton instructions; (4) erroneously applied a two-level vulnerable victim enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3Al.l(b)(l); and (5) refused to grant him a two-level downward departure for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1.

Co-defendant Ignacio Garcia-Rebollar (“Garcia”) challenges his sentence, arguing that the district court erred by refusing to depart downward to conform his sentence to those of two of his co-conspirators.

A. Batson Challenge

Melchor contends the prosecution exercised a peremptory challenge to strike potential juror Guillermo Zepeda because he is Hispanic.

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), outlines a three-step process for evaluating claims that a prosecutor has used peremptory challenges in a manner violating the Equal Protection Clause.…

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.