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 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. N A TH A N LA V EN D ER, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 12- 10024 D . C . N o. 3: 10 -c r- 08 08 9-G M S -1

ME MOR AN DU M *

A p p e a l f r o m th e U n ite d S ta te s D is tr ic t C o u rt f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona G . M urr a y S now , 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 r c h 15, 2013 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: N O O N A N , F IS H E R , an d N G U Y E N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. N a tha n L a ve nde rappe a l s hi s c onvi c t i on a nd s e nt e nc e f ora s s aul tw i th a da nge r ous w e apon, i n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . §§ 1153 a nd 113( a ) ( 3) , a nd a s s aul tby s tr ik in g , b e a tin g , o rw o u n d in g , in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § § 1 1 5 3 a n d 1 1 3 ( a ) ( 4 ) . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f irm . 

# FI LED

APR02 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

1 . L a v e n d e rc o n te n d s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e d in d e n y in g h is m o tio n to di sm i ss the i nd i ctm ent . In denyi ng the m ot i on , the di stri ctcourtm ade f ac tual f in d in g s , w h ic h w e r e v ie w f o rc le a re rr o r . Se e U

ni te d State s v . M

ar gue t- P i l lado , 5 6 0 F .3 d 1 0 7 8 , 1 0 8 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . L a v e n d e rc la im s th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t b r e a c h e d its o r a l p r o m is e n o t to prosec ut e hi m i n exchang e f or hi s t es t i m on y a s aw i tness i n an u nrel at ed p r o s e c u tio n o f

N a th a n M a n u e lito . A t th e e v id e n tia ry h e a r in g o n th e m o tio n to di sm i ss , L avender and his w i fe t es t i fi ed thatagentA ug gi e B el vado (“ B el vado ”) p r o m is e d to “p u s h o f

f ” L a v e n d e r ’s c a s e a n d “h e lp [ L a v e n d e r ] o u t” if h e te s tif ie d in the M anue l i to tri al . T hey f

urther t es t i fi ed thatthe A ss i st antU ni t ed S t at es A tt orney ( “ A U S A ” ) a gr e e d t o L a ve nde r ’ s r e que s tt o ha ve hi s c a s e “ s t a y tr i ba l ” a nd “ notgo fe dera l . ” H ow ever , bo th agentB el vado and the A U S A deni ed prom i si ng L avender l eni encyi n exchang e f

or hi s t es t i m on y. A tthe t i m e of the M a n u e lito tr ia l, L a ve nde r ’ s c a s e ha d notbe e n s ubm i tt e d t o the A U S A f orpr os e c ut i on. A ge nt B el vado i nt ervi ew ed L avender re gardi ng hi s c as e a ft erthe M anue l i to tr i a l e nde d, a n d th e tr a n s c r ip t o f

th e r e c o r d e d in te rv ie w c o n f irm s th a t a g e n t B e lv a d o to ld L a ve nde rtha thi s r e c or de d s t a t e m e nt s w oul d be s ubm i tt e d t o the pr os e c ut or . T he tr a n s c r ip t c o n ta in s n o e v id e n c e o f a n y p r o m is e r e g a r d in g n o n - p r o s e c u tio n .L a ve nde ra l s o br i e f l y s ugge s t s i n hi s O pe ni ng B r i e f tha tthe gove rnm e nt 1 com m i tt ed m i sc on du ctby fa i l i ng t o adv i se hi m of hi s r i gh t s und er Mi randa v. A r i z ona , 38 4 U . S . 43 6 (19 66 ), du ri ng the tri al prepara t i on of the M a n u e lito c a s e . L av en d er’ s fai l u re t o ad d ress h o w th e g o v ern m en tv i o l at ed h i s Mi r anda r ig h ts c o n s titu te s w a iv e ro f

th is is s u e . See M

a r t i n ez - Se r r a n o v . I

NS , 94 F . 3d 1256, 1259 (9th C i r. 19 96 ) ( “ Is sues ra i se d i n a bri ef thatar e notsupp ort ed by ar gu m entar e d e e m e d ab a n d o n e d .” ) . E ve n i f c ons i de r e d on the m e r i t s , no Mi r anda w a rni ngs w e r e r e qui r e d be c aus e he w a s nots ubj e c t e d t o c us t odi a l i nt e rr oga t i on dur i ng the in te rv ie w s . Se e S ta n s b u r y v . C a lifo rn ia , 5 1 1 U . S. 3 1 8 , 3 2 2 ( 1 9 9 4 ) ( p e rc u r i a m) ( s t a t i ng tha tthe pr ot e c t i ons out l i ne d i n Mi r anda ap p ly o n ly w h e n as u s p e c t is s u b je c te d to c u s to d ia l in te rr o g a tio n ) . 3 A ft ereval uat i ng the confl i ct i ng evi dence atthe heari ng , the di stri ctcourt f ound tha tthe r e w a s no or a l c oope r a t i on a gr e e m e nti n w hi c h the gove rnm e nt prom i se d n ott o p rose cut e L avender i n exchang e f or hi s t es t i m on y i n the M a n u e lito tr ia l. T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s f in d in g w a s n o t c le a r ly e rr o n e o u s . See L ew is v. Ayers , 681 F . 3d 992, 999 ( 9th C i r . 2012) ( “ W he r e the r e a r e tw o pe rm i s s i bl e vi e w s of the evi dence, the fa ct fi nd er ’ s c ho i ce betw ee n them cann otbe cl earl y e rr on eous. ” (i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed)) ; U n ite d S ta te s v . E llio tt , 3 2 2 F .3 d 7 1 0 , 7 1 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ( “[ W ]e p a y s p e c ia l d e f e r e n c e to atr ia l c o u rt’s c r e d ib ility f in d in g s .” ) . T here fore , the di stri ctcourt ’ s deni al of the m ot i on t o d i sm i ss w as prop er . 1 2. L a ve nde rc ont e nds tha tthe e vi de nc e w a s i ns uf f i c i e ntt o c onvi c thi m of a s s aul tw i th ada nge r ous w e apon. S pe c i f i c a l l y , he c l a i m s tha ta tthe t i m e of the a s s au lt, h e w a s s o in to x ic a te d th a t h e c o u ld n o t h a v e f o rm e d th e s p e c if

ic in te n t to do bodi l y ha rm . “ [ V ] i e w i ng the e vi de nc e i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the4

prosec ut i on , ” J

a c k s o n v . V ir g in ia , 4 4 3 U .S . 3 0 7 , 3 1 9 ( 1 9 7 9 ) , ar a tio n a l ju ry c o u ld r e a s o n ab ly c o n c lu d e th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s s u f f ic ie n t to c o n v ic t L a v e n d e rd e s p ite h is alco h o l co n su m p ti o n , b as ed o n h is ab il ity to : (1 ) f o ll o w v icti m L ar re ll T es sa y’s c a rt o the l oc a t i on w he r e the y ha d the i rf i r s ta l t e r c a t i on; ( 2) dr i ve t o the s e c ond lo c a tio n ; ( 3 ) g r ab ak n if e a n d s tab T e s s a y ; a n d ( 4 ) f le e th e s c e n e a f

te rth e s tab b in g . T he j ury r ec ei ved the i nt ox i ca t i on defe nse i nstruct i on , N i nth C i rc ui tM od el C rim in al Ju ry In stru ctio n N o . 6 .9 , w h ich allo w ed itto fin d th at L av en d er ’s in to x ic a tio n n e g a te d th e r e q u is ite s p e c if ic in te n t. H o w e v e r , th e ju ry c le a r ly re j ec t ed thatdefe nse bas ed on the evi dence. W e m ustgi ve defer ence t o that v e r d ic t. Se e U

n ite d S ta te s v . Cr o

ft , 124 F . 3d 1109, 1125 ( 9th C i r . 1997) ( s t a t i ng th at in re v iew in g su ff

icien cy o f e v id en ce , “ w e a re p o w er less to q u es ti o n a ju ry ’s a s s e s s m e n t o f

w itn e s s e s ’ c r e d ib ility ” ) ; U ni ted Stat es v. Kai

pa t P el isam en , 641 F . 3d 39 9, 40 9 n . 6 (9th C i r. 20 11 ) ( “ [W ] e m ustgi ve greatdefe re nce t o the j ury ver di ctO n ap p e a l, L a v e n d e ra ls o a r g u e s th a t h e a c te d in s e lf - d e f e n s e , 2 so the d is tr ic t c o u rt s h o u ld h a v e e n te r e d ad ir e c te d v e r d ic t in h is f a v o r . D u r in g tr ia l, L avender di d n otar gu e, no r di d h e r equestthatthe j ury be i nstruct ed on , se l fde f e ns e . A c c or di ngl y , w e de e m thi s i s s ue w a i ve d. See H ocke nb erryv. U

ni ted Stat es , 4 2 2 F . 2 d 1 7 1 , 1 7 3 (9 th C i r. 1 9 7 0 ) (treat i n g j u stcau se o r ex cu se as a d efen se unde r18 U . S . C . § 113) , a nd U ni te d State s v . Fuc hs , 21 8 F . 3d 95 7, 96 9 (9th C i r. 20 00 ) ( ho l di ng thataf

fi rm at i ve defense s c an be w ai ved i n cri m i nal ca se s) .

5 and m ustaf

fi rm i f any ra t i on al tri erof fa ctcoul d h ave f ou nd the evi dence suff i ci ent . ” ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed)) . 2 3. F i nal l y, L avender chal l enges the di stri ctcourt ’ s i m po si t i on of a fi ve-l evel se nt enci ng enhancem ent , pu rs uantt o U . S . S ent enci ng G ui del i nes M a nua l § 2A 2. 2( b) ( 3) ( B ) ( 2011) , ba s e d on the s e r i ous bodi l y i nj ury s us t a i ne d by T es say. A s aprel i m i narym att er , the part i es di sput e w hether the go vernm entw as r e qui r e d t o pr ove the f

a c t s s upport i ng the e nha nc e m e ntby apr e ponde r a nc e of the e v id e n c e o rb y ac le a ra n d c o n v in c in g e v id e n c e s ta n d a r d . See U ni ted Stat es v. A rm s te ad, 55 2 F . 3d 76 9, 77 6 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) ( no t i ng thatw hi l e adi stri ctcourt norm a l l y us e s apr e ponde r a nc e of the e vi de nc e w he n f

i ndi ng f a c t s a ts e nt e nc i ng, w here a s ent enci ng fa ct or has a n extre m el y di spropo rt i on at e e ff ec ton the se nt ence re l at i ve t o the offens e of c on vi ct i on , the di stri ctcourtm ustfi nd the fa ct s by acl ear a n d c o n v i n c i n g s t a n d a r d o f p r o o f ) . We n e e d n o tr e s o l v e th i s d i s p u t e b e c au s e we c onc l ude tha t , unde re i the rs t a nda r d, the e vi de nc e c l e a r l y s upport s the i m pos i t i on o f th e f iv e - le v e l s e n te n c in g e n h a n c e m e n t.6

T e s s a y w a s s tab b e d th r e e tim e s — o n c e to h is c h e s t a n d tw ic e to h is abdo m en— causi ng hi m extre m e physi ca l pai n. A do ct or t es t i fi ed thatthe st ab w ounds ne a r l y i nj ur e d hi s i nt e rna l m a m m a ry a rt e ry . T e s s a y w a s f l ow n by he l i c opt e rt o ahos pi t a l f ors ur ge ry a nd, abs e ntm e di c a l tr e a tm e nt , he c oul d ha ve di e d. T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notc l e a r l y e rri n f i ndi ng tha tT e s s a y s us t a i ne d s e r i ous b o d ily in ju ry . See U . S . S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s M a nua l § 1B 1. 1 c m t . n. 1( L ) ( 2011) ( “ ‘ S e r i ous bodi l y i nj ury ’ m e a ns i nj ury i nvol vi ng e xtr e m e phy s i c a l pa i n . . . or r e q u ir in g m e d ic a l in te rv e n tio n s u c h a s s u r g e ry , h o s p ita liz a tio n . . . .” ) . AF F I RME D.