Anderson

MEMORANDUM *

Curtis Anderson appeals his conviction for theft and conspiracy to commit theft against an Indian tribal organization, mail fraud and wire fraud. We resolved Anderson’s challenge to the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction in a separate published opinion. We now address the remaining issues raised on appeal, and affirm.

I

The district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting Peterson’s prior consistent statement. The court found that the charged motive to fabricate arose when the police officer told Peterson to “save your hide.” Tome v. United States, 513 U.S. 150, 166 , 115 S.Ct. 696 , 130 L.Ed.2d 574 (1995). The trial judge heard counsel for both defendants cross-examine Peterson, considered whether a motive to fabricate might have arisen earlier, evaluated the same argument Anderson makes now, and found that the “save your hide” comment without question was the trigger point. On this record, we cannot say that the district court’s ruling was an abuse of discretion.

II

Sufficient evidence supported Anderson’s conviction on Counts One and Three arising from the misappropriation of $25,000 of tribal money. A reasonable jury could find that Anderson…