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 a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th 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. C A R L O S S E R R A N O , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 50098 D. C . No . C R 0 7 - 1 1 8 - C AS 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 o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia C hr i s t i na A . S ny de r , 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 D e c e m be r10, 2010

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: T R O T T , W A R D L A W , an d IK U T A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T hough the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n ove rrul i ng de f e ns e c ouns e l ’ s obj e c t i on w hen the prosecut or as ked C ar l os S erra no du ri ng cr oss- exam i nat i on w hether P ost al S ervi ce Inspec t or K ug el w as “ l yi ng , ” U ni te d State s v . H

ar r is on , 585 F . 3d 1155, 1158 ( 9th C i r . 2009) , the gove rnm e ntha s s a t i s f i e d i t s bur de n of

e s t abl i s hi ng 

# FI LED DE C 16 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

h a r m le s s n e s s , U

ni ted Stat es v. H

erna nd ez , 109 F . 3d 1450, 1453 ( 9th C i r . 1997) ( pe rc ur i a m ) , by de m ons tr a t i ng tha ti ti s not“ m or e pr obabl e tha n nottha tthe al l eged m i sc on du ctaf

fe ct ed the j ury’ s ver di ct , ” U n i ted S ta tes v. N

o b a ri , 574 F . 3d 1065, 1082 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( quot i ng U ni te d State s v . Si m tob , 901 F . 2d 799, 806 ( 9th C i r . 1990) ) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a r ks om i tt e d) . F i r s t , the gove rnm e nt pr ovi de d a m pl e e vi de nc e tha tS e rr a no kne w tha the w a s pa r t i c i pa t i ng i n a f r a u d u le n t tr a n s a c tio n , U ni te d Stat e s v . W

e athe rs poon , 4 1 0 F .3 d 1 1 4 2 , 1 1 5 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ; see a l

so N o b a ri , 57 4 F . 3d at10 82 , i ncl ud i ng S erra no ’ s s w orn s t a t e m e nt , e m a i l s i ns truc t i ng hi m t o m a ke m i s r e pr e s e nt a t i ons t o the ba nk, doc um e nt s i n w hi c h S e rr a no c e r t i f i e d the ve r a c i ty of

f a l s e i nf or m a t i on, a nd t e s t i m oni a l e vi de nc e tha the e m pl oy e d a l i a s e s a nd ope ne d a ba nk a c c ountf orthe s o le p u rp o s e o f

d e p o s itin g f

u n d s f r o m th e tr a n s a c tio n . M oreover, because S erra no re spon ded t o the go vernm ent ’ s i m prop er q u e s tio n b y s ta tin g th a t K u g e l w a s te llin g th e tru th , th e q u e s tio n d id n o t p it S er ra n o ’s cr ed ib il ity a g ain st K u g el’s, a fa ct w h ich fu rth eru n d er cu ts S er ra n o ’s c la im th a t th e im p r o p e rq u e s tio n w a s h a r m f u l. Se e H

ar r is on , 585 F . 3d a t1159; U ni te d State s v . C om bs , 3 7 9 F .3 d 5 6 4 , 5 7 3 (9 th C ir. 2 0 0 4 ). C o n trar y to S er ra n o ’s a r gum e nt , the c a s e c a nnotbe r e duc e d t o a c r e di bi l i ty c ont e s tbe tw e e n S e rr a no a nd K ug el as t o the verac i ty of S erra no ’ s s t at em entthathe kn ew “ fr om day one” that3

th e tran sact i o n w as su sp i ci o u s, b ecau se th e g o v ern m en tn eed ed o n l y t o est ab l i sh th a t S e rr a n o k n e w d u r in g th e c o u r s e o f th e tr a n s a c tio n th a t h e w a s p a r tic ip a tin g in f r a u d u le n t a c tiv itie s . See 1 8 U .S .C . § § 3 7 1 , 1 3 4 4 ( 2 ) . F i nal l y, the courtadvi se d the j ury thati tw as the “ sol e a nd excl usi ve j ud ge[] of the cr edi bi l i ty of e ac h o f the w i tness es ca l l ed t o t es t i fy i n thi s c as e. ” See H ar r is on , 585 F . 3d a t1159–60. T h e ju ry is p re su m ed to h av e f o ll o w ed th e c o u rt’s in s tru c tio n s . See Zaf

i ro v. U ni ted Stat es , 5 0 6 U .S . 5 3 4 , 5 4 0

– 4 1 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . A FFI R M ED .