Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luis Fernando SALAS-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-04-19
Citations: 472 F. App'x 684
Docket Number: No. 10-50595
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luis Fernando SALAS-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 472
Pages: 684–684

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luis Fernando SALAS-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 10-50595.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 11, 2012.
Filed April 19, 2012.
Bruce R. Castetter, Matthew John Gardner, John B. Owens, Mark R. Rehe, Assistant U.S., Thomas C. Stahl, Chief Counsel, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Devin Burstein, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Shereen Joy Charlick, Esquire, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: FERNANDEZ and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges, and BLOCK, Senior District Judge.
The Honorable Frederic Block, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern New York, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The government appeals the district court's grant of a new trial in this case. Fed.R.Crim.P. 33(a) allows the district court to grant a new trial "if the interest of justice so requires." We review the district court's grant of new trial for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Kellington, 217 F.3d 1084, 1094-95 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm the grant of a new trial because the district court acted within its discretion in concluding that the expert testimony was unduly prejudicial under Fed.R.Evid. 403 and likely resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.