United States v. Peoples

── United States v. Peoples ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Date: April 08, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 8 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-6091 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 3:19-cr-00226-RS-13 v. MEMORANDUM* TIMOTHY PEOPLES, AKA Tee, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Richard Seeborg, Chief District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 3, 2025 San Francisco, California Before: R. NELSON, COLLINS, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges. Dissent by Judge COLLINS. Defendant–Appellant Timothy Peoples (“Peoples”) was convicted by a jury for cocaine trafficking. On appeal, Peoples alleges that the district court erred by excluding certain evidence and erred while instructing the jury. We do not address appellant’s briefed arguments concerning a sentencing enhancement and ineffective * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. assistance of counsel, which appellant’s counsel withdrew during argument. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the judgment of the district court. We review a district court’s “evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion and reverse if the exercise of discretion is both erroneous and prejudicial.” Wagner v. Cnty. of Maricopa, 747 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2013). We review the district court’s formulation of jury instructions for abuse of discretion. United States v. Tirouda, 394 F.3d 683, 688 (9th Cir. 2005), as amended on denial of reh’g and reh’g en banc (July 13, 2005). 1. Even assuming, without deciding, that the district court erred by excluding evidence of one police officer’s subsequent investigation and convictions, any such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of Peoples’ guilt. Reversal is not required where the government demonstrates that “it is more probable than not that the error did not materially affect the verdict.” United States v. Gonzalez-Flores, 418 F.3d 1093, 1099 (9th Cir. 2005). Here, the jury’s guilty verdict was supported by overwhelming evidence. Peoples admitted to agents that he purchased cocaine from a distributor several times each week and resold it to others. At trial, Peoples’ counsel admitted to the jury that Peoples “did buy and sell cocaine.” The government presented fifty-two recorded phone calls during which Peoples ordered cocaine from a distributor. The 2 24-6091 government also provided extensive surveillance evidence—via direct observation, phone and vehicle trackers, and cameras—of the drug transactions between Peoples and his distributor. The government presented cocaine, cocaine base, a cocaine- coated scale, a cocaine-coated grinder, and $15,000 of cash that were discovered in Peoples’ home. The government presented testimony and documentation about the collection of this evidence and explained that it was indicative of cocaine trafficking, not personal use. The government also presented substantial evidence that the officer who was subsequently investigated and convicted was not present during the search of Peoples’ home. The government has met its burden of demonstrating that “it is more probable than not” that the allegedly erroneous exclusion of evidence “did not mate