From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Mon Gen Yip

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 24, 2008
321 F. App'x 565 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-50304.

Submitted October 23, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed November 24, 2008.

Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Francisco Jose Sanchez, Jr., Law Office of Francisco Sanchez, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Barry T. Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-06-00417-BTM.

Before: CALLAHAN and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and SHADUR, District Judge.

The Honorable Milton I. Shadur, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedential except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Gerardo Mon Gen Yip ("Mon Gen Yip") appeals his jury conviction (1) for the importation of approximately 16.3 kilograms of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 and (2) for possession of the same amount with the intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Mon Gen Yip contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying on harmlessness grounds Mon Gen Yip's request for a mistrial because testimony as to his methamphetamine use, made in direct violation of the district court's in limine order prohibiting such testimony, had assertedly prejudiced the jury. We affirm.

Because the district court issued a proper limiting instruction, telling the jury to disregard the statement at issue immediately after it was made, it must be assumed that the jury followed the instruction and did not consider the testimony when rendering its verdict (see, e.g., Weeks v. Angelone, 528 U.S. 225, 234, 120 S.Ct. 727, 145 L.Ed.2d 727 (2000)). Furthermore, because Mon Gen Yip's conviction was supported by strong evidence apart from his methamphetamine use, a single reference to such use would have been harmless even if that testimony had been admitted in error without a proper limiting instruction ( United States v. Mehrmanesh, 689 F.2d 822, 832 (9th Cir. 1982)). There are thus two independent grounds for holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it concluded that the statement made about Mon Gen Yip's methamphetamine use was harmless in that it was more probable than not that it did not materially affect the jury's verdict ( United States v. Morales, 108 F.3d 1031, 1040 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc)).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Mon Gen Yip

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 24, 2008
321 F. App'x 565 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

United States v. Mon Gen Yip

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gerardo MON GEN YIP…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 24, 2008

Citations

321 F. App'x 565 (9th Cir. 2008)