Nnanna

MEMORANDUM ***

Defendant-appellant Barry Nnanna appeals his conviction following a jury trial for presenting false claims, conspiracy, bank fraud, and passing stolen Treasury checks. We affirm his conviction.

First, Nnanna contends that several of the prosecutor’s comments in closing argument improperly shifted the burden of proof to defendant. Both parties agree that a plain error standard of review is applied here because defendant failed to object to the challenged prosecutorial comments. See United States v. Williams, 990 F.2d 507, 510 (9th Cir.1993).

Because Nnanna did take the stand and testify, and the prosecutor’s comments cannot thus be construed to have been an improper comment on his failure to testify, Nnanna’s Fifth Amendment rights are not implicated. See United States v. Vaandering, 50 F.3d 696, 701-02 (9th Cir.1995).

Additionally, the prosecutor did not improperly shift the burden of proof, but rather, argued reasonable inferences from the evidence and merely replied to defendant’s arguments. See id. Regardless, even if any of the prosecutor’s statements were improper, none rise to the level of plain error.

Second, Nnanna argues that district court abused its…