United States v. Mark Chanley

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Mark David Chanley (Chan-ley) challenges his convictions for the receipt and possession of child pornography. Chanley contends that the district court erred in denying Chanley’s motion to suppress as untimely; that his speedy trial rights were violated; and that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for receipt of child pornography.

1. The district court properly denied Chanley’s second motion to suppress as untimely. See United States v. Murillo, 288 F.3d 1126, 1135 (9th Cir.2002) (“It does not matter that [Chanley] made a pre-trial motion to suppress on other grounds, for just as a failure to file a timely motion to suppress evidence constitutes a waiver, so too does a failure to raise a particular ground in support of a motion to suppress ....”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

The record is not sufficiently developed to allow resolution of Chanley’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See United States v. Mayweather, 634 F.3d 498, 507 (9th Cir.2010), as amended (“We review challenges to the effectiveness of counsel on direct appeal only (1) where the record on appeal is sufficiently developed to permit…