Ramirez-Arce

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Guillermo Ramirez-Arce appeals his jury trial conviction for importation of marijuana and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 952, and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Ramirez-Arce contends that the prosecution committed misconduct by (1) vouching for the credibility of its witnesses, and (2) commenting on Ramirez-Arce’s silence during trial. Neither claim has merit.

“Vouching consists of placing the prestige of the government behind a witness through personal assurances of the witness’s veracity, or suggesting that information not presented to the jury supports the witness’s testimony.” United States v. Weatherspoon, 410 F.3d 1142, 1146 (9th Cir.2005) (quoting United States v. Necoechea, 986 F.2d 1273, 1276 (9th Cir.1993)). The record here shows that there was no vouching engaged in by the prosecution, merely permissible witness rehabilitation and restatements of the witness’s own testimony. See Necoechea, 986 F.2d at 1278-79 ; United States v. McChristian, 47 F.3d 1499, 1507 (9th Cir.1995) (“[I]n fashioning closing arguments, prosecutors are allowed reasonably…