Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Everardo HERNANDEZ-BELTRAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-01-20
Citations: 466 F. App'x 658
Docket Number: No. 11-50025
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Everardo HERNANDEZ-BELTRAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 466
Pages: 658–659

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Everardo HERNANDEZ-BELTRAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-50025.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Jan. 10, 2012.
Filed Jan. 20, 2012.
Michael Lewis Merriman, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Bruce R. Castetter, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jason I. Ser, Esquire, Supervisory, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, REINHARDT and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Everardo Hernandez-Beltran entered a conditional plea to one count of knowingly importing a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952 and 960, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment due to alleged errors in the grand jury instruction. We affirm.
The district judge did not err in responding "correct" to a prospective grand juror's statement that "something must have happened" prior to an individual's case being presented before the grand jury. The "correct" confirmed that other actors were involved in the criminal process, but did not suggest that the grand jury's determination should in any way be influenced by those actors' determinations. See United States v. Caruto, 663 F.3d 394, 401 (9th Cir.2011).
We have previously held that the other grand jury instructions that appellant challenges are not constitutionally defective. See id. at 401-02; United States v. Cortez-Rivera, 454 F.3d 1038, 1040-41 (9th Cir.2006); United States v. Navarro-Vargas, 408 F.3d 1184, 1202-03, 1206-08 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.