United States v. Shawn Rice

The central question in this appeal is whether the district court denied Shawn Rice his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation. Although the district court should have acted more promptly in granting Rice’s request to appear pro se, we find no constitutional violation. We also reject Rice’s argument that the district court failed to comply with the Speedy Trial Act. We therefore affirm Rice’s convictions. However, because the government concedes error in sentencing and in calculating restitution and forfeiture, we vacate Rice’s sentence and remand for further proceedings.

I.

On March 3, 2009, Shawn Rice was indicted in the District of Nevada for conspiracy to commit money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (h) and money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (a)(3)(A). Rice’s initial appearance and arraignment were on March 6, 2009. During that proceeding, Rice and the magistrate judge engaged in the following colloquy:

Rice then pleaded not guilty and addressed the court at length regarding pretrial release. Kimbrell also made a presentation regarding Rice’s bail status, and the magistrate judge released Rice on his own recognizance pending trial…