Staggs

MEMORANDUM *

Michael Staggs (“Staggs”) appeals his conviction of seven counts of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 and his eighty-seven month sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm Staggs’ conviction and remand pursuant to United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

I.

Staggs challenges the district court’s decision to admit, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), 1 evidence of his involvement in other fraudulent investment programs not charged in the indictment. We review the district court’s decision to admit Rule 404(b) evidence for abuse of discretion. United States v. Arambula-Ruiz, 987 F.2d 599, 602 (9th Cir. 1993). We conclude that the district court acted within its discretion in admitting the prior bad acts evidence.

The elements of wire fraud are: “a scheme to defraud, use of the wires in furtherance of the scheme, and the specific intent to defraud.” United States v. McNeil, 320 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 842 , 124 S.Ct. 111 , 157 L.Ed.2d 77 (2003). Here, evidence relating to Staggs’ involvement with prior investment programs demonstrated…