United States v. Williams
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Thomas Williams and Robert Mitchell appeal their convictions on one count each of sports bribery and conspiracy to commit sports bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 224 and 2. We affirm.
Williams and Mitchell both argue that the district court abused its discretion in admitting Denmark fight evidence. We agree that it was not “inextricably intertwined” with the charged conduct, but may affirm on any basis supported by the record. United States v. Gonzalez-Rincon, 36 F.3d 859, 866 (9th Cir.1994). The evidence was relevant and admissible under Rule 404(b) as it tends “to show the background and development of the conspiracy,” United States v. Hill, 953 F.2d 452, 457 (9th Cir.1991), and to show knowledge of the conspiracy’s objective to throw the Melito fight, see United States v. Holler, 411 F.3d 1061, 1067 (9th Cir.2005). It was sufficient to support a finding that Williams intentionally lost that fight, United States v. Smith, 282 F.3d 758, 768 (9th Cir.2002); the circumstances were similar to the offense charged here as in each case Williams was involved in a fight that was fixed; and the Denmark events occurred only a few months before the Nevada fight and so…