United States v. Darrell Jones

MEMORANDUM

Darrell Jones (Jones) appeals his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). We affirm.

1. In its closing argument, the government advanced plausible interpretations of the evidence rather than misleading the jury or impugning the defense. See United States v. Sullivan, 522 F.3d 967, 982 (9th Cir.2008) (explaining that no prosecu-torial misconduct occurs when reasonable inferences are argued from the evidence). Neither did the government improperly vouch for Deputy Lee. See United States v. Brooks, 508 F.3d 1205, 1209 (9th Cir.2007) (describing improper vouching as “plac[ing] the prestige of the government behind a witness” or indicating that evidence not before the jury bolsters the witness’ testimony).

2. The district court properly determined that the no-contact violation evidence was admissible for the purpose of presenting the background facts leading to Jones’ arrest. See United States v. De-George, 380 F.3d 1203, 1220 (9th Cir.2004) (describing the admission of evidence that is “inextricably intertwined” with the charged offense). Because the district court limited use of the no-contact violation and…