United States v. Changa Lake

MEMORANDUM

Changa Lake appeals his jury conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). Lake argues the district court erred in (1) failing to allow him to argue lack of fingerprint evidence at closing argument, (2) failing to suppress evidence, (3) failing to read back the entire testimony of a witness, and (4) failing to find a violation of his right to a speedy trial. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1291 , and we affirm the district court.

1. We review the district court’s decision to limit Lake’s closing argument regarding fingerprint evidence for an abuse of discretion, United States v. La-zarenko, 564 F.3d 1026, 1043 (9th Cir.2009), although the issue of whether this limitation violated Lake’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel is reviewed de novo. United States v. Doe, 705 F.3d 1134, 1149 (9th Cir.2013). While a “complete denial of summation violates the [Sixth Amendment] Assistance of Counsel Clause,” Glebe v. Frost, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 429, 431 , 190 L.Ed.2d 317 (2014) (emphasis added), trial courts have “broad discretion” in “controlling the duration and scope of closing summations.” Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853,…