Opinion ID: 753501
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: Lovett's Closing Argument

Text: 51 Appellant Lovett contends that the district court improperly restricted his closing argument. He wanted to argue that the Government's failure to play recordings of his sales pitches suggests that the tapes would have shown that the Appellant had not made any misrepresentations. 52 Granted, the Government's failure to produce relevant evidence within its control gives rise to an inference that the evidence would be unfavorable to it. U.S. v. Tory, 52 F.3d 207, 211 (9th Cir.1995). However, the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that there was no evidence in the record that tapes of Lovett's sales even existed. Although other sales representatives had testified about their individual experiences with being recorded, there was no direct evidence that Lovett himself had been recorded. When asked, no witness had heard tapes of Lovett specifically. 53