T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J ON AT HA N L E ON T OL I VE R , AK A K B oo se , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 08- 10328 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 6 - c r - 0 0 2 3 4 - PM PG W F -2 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

N e va da P hi l i p M . P r o, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a y10, 2010 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: H U G , R Y M E R an d M cK E O W N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J ona tha n L e on T ol i ve rappe a l s hi s j uryc onvi c t i on of m ul t i pl e c ount s of V io le n t C r im e in A ido f R a c k e te e r in g ( “V I C A R ” ) , in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . 

# FI LED MA Y21 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

§ 1 9 5 9 , f o rm u r d e r , c o n s p ir a c yto c o m m it m u r d e r , a tte m p te dm u r d e r , a n da s s au lt w i th ada nge r ous w e apon, a nd m ul t i pl e c ount s of us e of af i r e a rm dur i ng ac r i m e of v i o l e n c e , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 1 8 U . S. C. § § 9 2 4 ( c ) a n d9 2 4 ( j ) . W e a f

f i rm. T h e i n d i c tm e n tp r o v i d e d a d e q u a t e n o t i c e o f th e c h a r g e s a g a i n s tT o l i v e r . As w e ha ve he l d i n the V I C A R c ont e xt , “ a n i ndi c tm e nts e tt i ng f orth the e l e m e nt s of the of f e ns e i s ge ne r a l l ys uf

f i c i e nt . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. F e rna nde z , 388 F . 3d 1199, 1 2 1 9 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ); see al so F ed . R . C ri m . P . 7 (c)(1 ). T h e “ u se o f a ‘ b are b o n es’ in f o rm a tio n— th a t is [ ,] o n e e m p lo y in g th e s ta tu to ryla n g u a g e a lo n e — is . . . e n tir e ly suff i ci entso l on g as the st atut e s et s f orth ful l y, di re ct l y and cl earl y a l l es se nt i al e l e m e nt s of

the c r i m e t o be puni s he d. ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. W oodruf f , 50 F . 3d 673, 67 6 (9th C i r. 19 95 ) ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). T ol i ver’ s i nd i ctm entse t f orth a l l the e s s e nt i a l e l e m e nt s of aV I C A R “ s t a tus c r i m e . ” C ons e que nt l y , the d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tlyd e n ie d T o liv e r ’s m o tio n to d is m is s th e in d ic tm e n t. T he j ury’ s f

i nd i ng thatS qu ad U p eng aged i n p re di ca t e r ac ket ee ri ng w as s u p p o rte d b ys u f

f ic ie n t e v id e n c e . V ie w in g th e e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le t o the pr os e c ut i on, ar a t i ona l j ur orc oul d ha ve f ound be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubt thatS qu ad U p w as engaged i n d rug tra ff i cki ng and act s of a tt em pt ed m urder. S ee U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B r a c y , 67 F . 3d 1421, 1429 ( 9th C i r . 1995) . T he e vi de nc e of drug3

tr a f f ic k in g a ls o s u f

f ic e d to e s tab lis h th e r e q u is ite “d e m in im is e f f e c t o n in te r s ta te c o m m e r c e .” F e rn a n d e z , 3 8 8 F .3 d a t 1 2 4 8 - 4 9 . T ol i ver’ s a tt ac ks on the j ury i nstruct i on s f ai l . A l tho ug h the di stri ctcourt i ns truc t e d tha tthe j uryw a s obl i ga t e d t o f i nd tha t“ a tl e a s tone of

de f e nda nt T ol i ver’ s purpo se s or m ot i ves i n com m i tt i ng the [V IC A R offe nses ] ” w as t o ent er or m ai nt ai n o r i ncre as e hi s posi t i on i n S qu ad U p, i tal so expl ai ned thatthe j ury

“ ne e d onl yf

i nd” tha tT ol i ve rha d a“ ge ne r a l ordom i na ntpurpos e ” of e nha nc i ng hi s s t a tus w i thi n S qua d U p orc om m i tt e d the vi ol e nta c ta s a n “ i nt e gr a l a s pe c t ” of hi s ga ng m e m be r s hi p. T he “ ge ne r a l ordom i na ntpurpos e ” i ns truc t i on c ur e d the error w e i dent i fi ed i n U ni t ed S t at es v. B anks, 51 4 F . 3d 95 9, 96 9-70 (9th C i r. 2008) . W he n r e a d a s aw hol e , the j uryi ns truc t i ons w e r e s uf f i c i e ntt o gui de the j ury’ s del i bera t i on s. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. F re ga, 17 9 F . 3d 79 3, 80 6 n . 16 (9th C i r. 1 9 9 9 ) . T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d note rrbyf a i l i ng t o i ns truc tthe j uryt o a gr e e upon a s p e c if ic p r e d ic a te a c t o f

r a c k e te e r in g a c tiv ity . R a th e r , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt c o rr e c tly i ns truc t e d the j urya s t o the de f i ni t i on of r a c ke t e e r i ng a c t i vi tya s w e l l a s the e le m e n ts o f

e a c h a lle g e d p r e d ic a te r a c k e te e r in g a c t. A lth o u g h th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id notgi ve as pe c i f

i c i ns truc t i on c l a r i f

y i ng tha tthe pr e di c a t e r a c ke t e e r i ng a c t s of m ur de ra nd a tt e m pt e d m ur de rne e de d t o be s e pa r a t e a nd di s t i nc tf r om the4

s ubs t a nt i ve of

f e ns e s c har ge d i n the V I C A R c ount s , s e e B r a c y , 67 F . 3d a t1429, the abse nce of thi s i nstruct i on caused T ol i ver no p re j ud i ce i n l i gh tof the j ury i ns truc t i ons a s aw hol e a nd the e vi de nc e of S qua d U p’ s i nvol ve m e nti n a c t s of a tt e m pt e d m ur de rdi s t i nc tf r om the e ve nt s of

S e pt e m be r13, 2004. F r e ga , 179 F . 3d a t806 n. 16. F i na l l y , the i ns truc t i ons do notde pa rtf r om the i ndi c tm e ntbya ddi ng m ur de ra nd a tt e m pt e d m ur de ra s pr e di c a t e r a c ke t e e r i ng a c t i vi ty . A l though the i ndi c tm e nts pe c i f

i c a l l yi de nt i f

i e s r obbe rya nd drug tr a f f i c ki ng a s the r a c ke t e e r i ng a c t i v i tyc h a r g e d , th e i n d i c tm e n ta s awh o l e r e p e a t e d l ya l l e g e dth a tS q u a dUp e n g a g e d in a c ts a n d th r e a ts o f m u r d e r . T he gove rnm e ntdi d notvi ol a t e T ol i ve r ’ s due pr oc e s s r i ght s unde rB r a dyv. M aryl and, 37 3 U . S . 83 (196 3), by fa i l i ng t o d i sc l ose i m peac hm entevi dence re gardi ng D B . A l tho ug h the prosecut i on w i thh el d i nform at i on re gardi ng the i ni t i al p o lic e in te rv ie w w ith D B a n d D B ’s ju v e n ile r e c o r da n dp s y c h ia tr ic h is to ry , a ll m at eri al i n fo rm at i o n w as d i scl o sed t o T o l i v er b y th e t i m e o f D B ’ s cro sse xa m i na t i on, a nd c ouns e l w a s abl e t o c onduc ta n e f f e c t i ve c r os s - e xa m i na t i on on the m at er i al i ss ues. S ee S i l va v. B row n, 41 6 F . 3d 98 0, 98 5-86 (9th C i r. 20 05 ); se e a l s o U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B r ow ne , 829 F . 2d 760, 765 ( 9th C i r . 1987) ( r e j e c t i ng B r a dy c h a lle n g e to ta r d yd is c lo s u r e o f im p e a c h m e n t e v id e n c e w h e r e c o u n s e l w a s s till ab le to m a k e “e f

f e c tiv e u s e ” o f

th e e v id e n c e ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t c o m m it5

c l e a re rr ori n de c l i ni ng t o di s c l os e D B ’ s f ul l j uve ni l e r e c or d a s thi s i nf orm a t i on w as no t“ prob at i ve, re l evant , [or] m at er i al ” t o T ol i ver’ s B ra dy cl ai m . U ni t ed S t a t e s v. S tr i f

l e r , 851 F . 2d 1197, 1202 ( 9th C i r . 1988) . S t i f l e rdoe s notc a l l f

or r e v i e w o f

r e c o r d s u n r e l a t e d t o To l i v e r ’ s Br a d yc l a i m. T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n a dm i tt i ng the c ha l l e nge d e v id e n c e . T h e e v id e n c e o f th e s o - c a lle d“P r in c e S c o ttyin c id e n t” te n d e dto id e n tif yT o liv e ra s as h o o te ra t C a r e yA rm s . B e c au s e th e e v id e n c e w a s d ir e c tly re l evantt o the charges agai nsthi m , any pre j ud i ce t o T ol i ver w as no t“ un fa i r” un der F eder al R ul e of E vi dence 403 . U ni t ed S t at es v. S i tt on , 96 8 F . 2d 94 7, 95 8 (9th C i r. 1992) , abr oga t e d on othe rgr ounds byK oon v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 518 U . S . 81, 96- 100 (199 6). E ven ass um i ng thatthe excerpt s f rom H oo d2 H oo d: T he B l ocku m ent ary and the l yr i cs t o L i l ’ W ay ne’ s “ W here Y ou A t ” w er e m ore prej ud i ci al than p r o b a tiv e , T o liv e rh a s n o t s h o w n th a t e x c lu d in g th e e v id e n c e w o u ldm o r e lik e ly th a n n o t h a v e a f

f e c te d th e v e r d ic t. O th e rn o n - p r e ju d ic ia l e v id e n c e s u f

f ic e dto e s t ab l i s h S q u a d Up ’ s e x i s t e n c e , f i r e a rm s u s e a n dp o s s e s s i o n b yS q u a dUp m e m be r s , a nd T ol i ve r ’ s i l l e ga l a c t i vi ty . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. P a ng, 362 F . 3d 1187, 1 1 9 2 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ). F i n al l y, ev en assu m i n g th atT o l i v er p ro p erl y rai sed th ese a r gum e nt s i n hi s ope ni ng br i e f , T ol i ve rha s nots how n how the a dm i s s i on of6

te s tim o n yb yD a v is , W e s tb r o o k , a n dL a q u in taa n dT o n y e ll W a s h in g to n c au s e dh im prej ud i ce . T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n a dm i tt i ng the t e s t i m onyof th e p ro se cu ti o n ’s g an g ex p er ts, D etec ti v es B o d n aran dW alk er . T h e g o v ern m en t’ s pr of f e rof B odna r ’ s t e s t i m onyi n de f e nda ntR i c ha r d’ s j uve ni l e tr a ns f e rhe a r i ng a nd i t s n o t i ce th atB o d n ar an d W al k er w o u l dt est i fy o n th e b asi s o f th ei r i n v est i g at i o n s, tra i ni ng , and exp er i ence w er e s uffi ci entt o sat i sf y F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P r oc e dur e 16( a ) ( 1) ( G ) . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M e ndoz a - P a z , 286 F . 3d 1104, 1111 ( 9th C i r . 2002) . T he de t e c t i ve s ’ know l e dge , e xpe r i e nc e , a nd i nve s t i ga t i on of ga ng ac t i vi ty a l so prov i ded a suff i ci entfoun dat i on for thei r t es t i m on y und erF eder al R u le o f E v id e n c e 7 0 2 . S e e U n ite dS ta te s v . H a n k e y , 2 0 3 F .3 d1 1 6 0 , 1 1 6 8 - 6 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . AF F I RME D.