Parra-Perez

MEMORANDUM **

Carlos Parra-Perez appeals his jury convictions for bringing an alien into the United States for financial gain, aiding and abetting, inducing and encouraging illegal aliens to enter the United States, and fraud and misuse of entry documents in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (a)(l)(A)(iv) & (v)(II) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 & 1546(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

Parra-Perez argues that the district court erred in admitting his prior alien smuggling conviction because the pri- or conviction was not sufficiently similar to the charged crimes. We review the district court’s decision to admit the evidence for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Plancarte-Alvarez, 366 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir.2004). Because the government asserted that the prior crime was relevant to prove knowledge, it was required to prove similarity — “a logical connection between the knowledge gained as a result of the commission of the prior act and the knowledge at issue in the charged act.” United States v. Mayans, 17 F.3d 1174, 1181-82 (9th Cir.1994). The district court did not abuse its discretion by finding that the prior alien smuggling offense was similar to the…