United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Darryl Bruce Needham, Aka Darryl Needham, Defendant-appellant, 2 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1993)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Darryl Needham appeals his conviction and forty-one-month sentence imposed after a jury trial for dealing in and uttering counterfeit obligations in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 472, 473. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Needham's counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record and a brief identifying two possible issues for review: (1) whether the district court abused its discretion by ruling that Needham could be impeached with a prior felony conviction if he testified; and (2) whether the district court erroneously applied U.S.S.G. Sec. 1B1.3 in calculating Needham's offense level based upon the amount of counterfeit currency seized from an accomplice. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.¹ 

Because Needham did not testify at trial, he waived his claim of improper impeachment. See United States v. Johnson, 903 F.2d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 985 (1990); see also Galindo v. Y1st, 971 F.2d 1427, 1429 (9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 2351 (1993).

The government presented substantial evidence connecting Needham to the counterfeit currency seized from an accomplice's home. The district court therefore did not clearly err by finding that Needham was part of a jointly-undertaken criminal activity to distribute counterfeit currency in excess of $500,000. See United States v. Sanchez, 967 F.2d 1383, 1385 (9th Cir. 1992); United States v. Garcia, 909 F.2d 1346, 1350 (9th Cir. 1990) Thus, the court properly calculated Needham's offense level.

Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw as counsel of record is GRANTED and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.