Eldridge

United States v. Eldridge

Good Law
107 F. App'x 36
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 13, 2004No. 03-50148California1,604 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Stacy Eldridge was convicted by jury on three counts: (1) conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 3,4-methylene-dioxymethamphetamine (“ecstacy” or “MDMA”), in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (Count One); (2) conspiracy to import MDMA, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963 (Count Two); and (3) aiding and abetting the importation of MDMA, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 (a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (a) (Count Seven). She challenges the validity of her convictions on numerous grounds. We AFFIRM.

1. The Government’s Motion for Reconsideration

Eldridge contends that the district court did not have jurisdiction to grant the government’s motion for reconsideration of an order dismissing the charges against her in the third superseding indictment. Alternatively, Eldridge argues that the district court erred in granting the government’s motion. We consider a district court’s exercise of jurisdiction de novo. United States v. Matta-Ballesteros, 71 F.3d 754, 762 (9th Cir.1995), amended by 98 F.3d 1100 (9th Cir.1996). We review the district court’s decision to reinstate a dismissed indictment for abuse of discretion. United States v. Villapuduar-Perada, 896 F.2d 1154,…

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.