United States v. Arianna Rosales
This text of 668 F. App'x 799 (United States v. Arianna Rosales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Arianna Rosales appeals her jury conviction for conspiracy to steal casino funds in *800 excess of $1000, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1167(b); theft from a gaming establishment in excess of $1000, in violation of § 1167(b); and theft from a gaming establishment in an amount less than $1000, in violation of § 1167(a). The convictions arose out of a fraudulent scheme in which Rosales kicked back winning proceeds of casino drawings in which she never participated. The scheme was orchestrated by two casino employees.
Rosales contends that the district court should have granted her motion for acquittal or new trial because the evidence was insufficient to establish a single conspiracy. She contends there were multiple conspiracies. Her theory is flawed. Multiple conspiracies require multiple agreements and purposes. United States v. Taren-Palma, 997 F.2d 525, 530 (9th Cir. 1993) (per curiam). Here, the same co-conspirators were involved in the entire scheme and there was one overall agreement. See United States v. Patterson, 819 F.2d 1495, 1502 (9th Cir. 1987).
The evidence of the prior “Hot Seats” promotion was admissible under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided *800 by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
668 F. App'x 799, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-arianna-rosales-ca9-2016.