Montes

United States v. Montes

Good Law
116 F. App'x 105
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 9, 2004Nos. 03-50217, 03-50258; D.C. Nos. CR-01-00056-RT-01, CR-01-00056-RJTCalifornia628 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Jose Nicolas Sanches Montes and Gustavo Sanches Montes appeal their convictions for distribution of methamphetamine and conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. Gustavo Montes also appeals his sentence of 240 months’ imprisonment and 10 years’ supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

Gustavo Montes contends that the district court erred in excluding evidence regarding the DEA informant’s pri- or convictions, arrests that did not result in convictions and deportations. The court admitted evidence regarding the payments and benefits the informant received for his *107 work for the DEA, his past and present drug use, his illegal alien status and lies that he told to government officials. Because the district court allowed sufficient cross-examination for the jury to appraise the informant’s bias and motives, the exclusions did not violate the Confrontation Clause. See, e.g., United States v. Bensimon, 172 F.3d 1121, 1128 (9th Cir.1999). Because the district court reasonably found that the dangers of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, undue delay and misleading the jury outweighed the probative value of the evidence, the exclusions did…

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.