Nichol

United States v. Nichol

Good Law
134 F. App'x 135
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 6, 2005Nos. 03-30181, 03-30183, 03-30184California2,279 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Tyler L. Nichol, Lee A. Rice, and Kevin P. Pawlik appeal their jury convictions and sentences for various offenses arising from an alleged conspiracy to distribute MDMA (ecstasy) and LSD in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part and remand in part.

We begin by addressing the defendants’ vouching claims. Improper vouching occurs when the prosecution “implies that the government can guarantee the witness’s veracity” by (1) “placing the prestige of the government behind a witness through personal assurances of the witness’s veracity”; or (2) “suggesting that information not presented to the jury supports the witness’s testimony.” United States v. Daas, 198 F.3d 1167, 1178 (9th Cir.1999).

The prosecution did not engage in improper vouching when it elicited testimony from the government’s cooperating witnesses “regarding their veracity, willingness to take polygraphs, and assistance to law enforcement on other unrelated cases.” Because defense counsel impugned the veracity of the government’s witnesses by raising the issue of the witnesses’ plea agreements on cross-examination, and by…

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.