Ramos-Lopez

MEMORANDUM ***

Marcelino Ramos-Lopez appeals his conviction for conspiracy to manufacture 1000 + marijuana plants in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A)(vii) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 . We affirm Ramos-Lopez’s conviction.

*168 We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of Ramos-Lopez’s motion for a bill of particulars. See United States v. Ayers, 924 F.2d 1468, 1483 (9th Cir.1991). The purposes of a bill of particulars are satisfied where the indictment sufficiently details the charges and the government provides full discovery to the defense. See United States v. Mitchell, 744 F.2d 701, 705 (9th Cir.1984).

Ramos-Lopez does not contest the sufficiency of discovery, and the indictment provided him with sufficient details of the charges. We agree with the district court that a bill of particulars was not necessary.

We review de novo whether the district court’s instructions adequately presented Ramos-Lopez’s theory of the case, to the extent that it was supported by law and founded in the evidence. See United States v. Somsamouth, 352 F.3d 1271, 1274 (9th Cir.2003); United States v. Duran, 59 F.3d 938,…