Case ID: f-appx_192/html/0700-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Ronald W. BATCH, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-10105.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 25, 2006.
    
    Decided July 27, 2006.
    Richard J. Bender, Esq., USSAC — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Joseph J. Wiseman, Esq., Law Office of Joseph J. Wiseman, Davis, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: T.G. NELSON, SILVERMAN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ronald W. Batch appeals the district court’s admission of evidence at his trial. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Regardless of whether the records in question were organized and used to prepare Batch’s personal income tax, they were also business records. Thus, paragraph eight properly allowed their seizure and we affirm under any standard of review.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     
      
      . United States v. Marbella, 73 F.3d 1508, 1515 (9th Cir.1996) (explaining that, in reviewing mixed questions of fact and law, a reviewing court applies different standards depending on whether legal or factual issues predominate).