Opinion
Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California April 14, 2015
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. D.C. No. 4:13-cr-00213-FRZLAB-1. Frank R. Zapata, Senior District Judge, Presiding.
For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Ryan Ellersick, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU- Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ.
For Paciano Lizarraga-Tirado, AKA: Pasiano Lizarraga-Tirado, Defendant - Appellant: Roger H. Sigal, Esquire, Attorney, Law Office of Roger H. Sigal, Tucson, AZ.
Before: KOZINSKI and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and PONSOR, Senior District Judge.
The Honorable Michael A. Ponsor, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, sitting by designation.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
1. Defendant didn't object to the alleged instances of prosecutorial misconduct, so we review for plain error. Any error was not " plain" because the prosecutor's passing reference to his interview with Agent Nunez and his statement that the case was " memorable" for Agent Garcia weren't " clear or obvious" prosecutorial misconduct. United States v. Anguiano-Morfin, 713 F.3d 1208, 1211 (9th Cir. 2013).
2. The district court didn't abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of multiple prior removals. " [P]roving that the defendant has been previously removed is an essential element" of a section 1326 conviction, and the government may introduce evidence of multiple removals " to hedge the risk that the jury may reject the offered proof of one [removal], but not the other." United States v. Martinez-Rodriguez, 472 F.3d 1087, 1091 (9th Cir. 2007).
AFFIRMED.