Case ID: f-appx_540/html/0648-01.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-Appellant, v. Ortencia SEGURA-SEGURA, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 12-10600.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 11, 2013.
    
    Filed Sept. 24, 2013.
    Elizabeth Olson White, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USRE-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Richard Molezzo, Esquire, Hardy Law Group, Reno, NV, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: ALARCÓN and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and ZOUHARY, District Judge.
    
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
      
         The Honorable Jack Zouhary, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

The United States appeals the dismissal of Ortencia Segura-Segura’s indictment on the ground of selective prosecution. Such a dismissal can only be sustained by “clear evidence” that “(1) other similarly situated individuals have not been prosecuted and (2) [the defendant’s] prosecution was based on an impermissible motive.” United States v. Sutcliffe, 505 F.3d 944, 954 (9th Cir.2007) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, no evidence supports selective prosecution, let alone “clear evidence.” The dismissal is thus REVERSED and the case REMANDED to the district court to reinstate the indictment. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.