Aburto-Castellanos

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Fernando Aburto-Castellanos (“Appellant”) was convicted of conspiracy to bribe a public official; aiding and abetting; and payment of a gratuity to a public official.

Appellant contends that the district court erred in not concluding he was entrapped as a matter of law. He also contends that the prosecution failed to comply with its disclosure obligations under Brady v. Maryland 2 and that therefore his conviction should be overturned or, alternatively, he should be granted a new trial.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Entrapment

Before the district court and again in the present appeal, Appellant contends *15 that he was entrapped as a matter of law. 3 We review de novo whether Appellant established his entrapment defense. United States v. McConney, 728 F.2d 1195, 1201 (9th Cir.1984) (en banc). There are two elements to entrapment: government inducement and the absence of any predisposition by the defendant to commit the offense. United States v. Garza-Juarez, 992 F.2d 896, 908 (9th Cir.1993).

Appellant raises a novel argument of inducement: that the Government’s failure to investigate quickly enough his claims of…