Frank Relerford v. United States

Relerford appeals from the judgment upon his conviction by a jury of a violation of section 2421, Title 18 U.S.C. This is the second appeal in this case. In the first appeal we reversed the conviction on the ground that the court had, for .reasons stated in our opinion, denied him an opportunity to secure counsel of his own choice to assist him in his defense. Releford [sic] v. United States, 288 F.2d 298 , decided March 2, 1961. - On this appeal, Releford makes five contentions which we consider seriatim.

1. He claims that he was not afforded a speedy trial as required by the sixth amendment to the Constitution of the United States. No such contention was made on the prior appeal, and it is apparent that his claim can relate only to what happened after the decision in that appeal. So far as the record shows, the contention was never raised below, and this would be a sufficient basis for refusing to consider it here. (See Campodonico v. United States, 9 Cir., 1955, 222 F.2d 310, 316 , cert. denied, 350 U.S. 831 , 76 S.Ct. 65 , 100 L.Ed. 742 , and cases there cited) However, because Relerford proceeded in pro. per., both below and here, we consider the point.

The record shows…