888 F2d 1394 United States v. Ridgeway
888 F.2d 1394
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Martin Allen RIDGEWAY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 88-5399.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Oct. 4, 1989.
Decided Nov. 3, 1989.
Before HUG, FARRIS, and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM*
We have carefully reviewed Martin Allen Ridgeway's attack against the trial court's evidentiary rulings. The record provides a sound basis for those rulings. The identifications were reliable. See Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377, 384 (1986); United States v. Bagley, 772 F.2d 482, 492 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1023 (1986); United States v. Field, 625 F.2d 862, 868 n. 2 (9th Cir.1980). The search of the vehicle was supported by probable cause. See United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1, 12 (1977); Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 (1970); United States v. Bagley, supra. The videotape demonstrations were more probative than prejudicial. See Fjelstad v. American Honda Motor Co., 762 F.2d 1334, 1337 (9th Cir.1985); United States v. Brady, 579 F.2d 1121 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1074 (1979). See also United States v. Mehrmanesh, 689 F.2d 822, 832 (9th Cir.1982).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Circuit Rule 36-3