United States v. Miguel Osuna-Alvarez

MEMORANDUM

Miguel Osuna-Alvarez (“Osuna”) appeals his convictions for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960, and aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. Osuna first contends that his jury trial waiver is invalid because it was not made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently. “We review the adequacy of a jury-trial waiver de novo.” United States v. Shorty, 741 F.3d 961, 965 (9th Cir.2013). Where, as here, “the defendant’s mental or emotional state is a substantial issue,” the district court is required to conduct “an in-depth colloquy which reasonably assures the court that under the particular facts of the case, the signed waiver was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made.” United States v. Christensen, 18 F.3d 822, 825-26 (9th Cir.1994). We have clarified that “[a]n in-depth colloquy ... includes instructing the defendant of the four facts listed in Cochran.” Shorty, 741 F.3d at 966 (citing United States v. Cochran, 770 F.2d 850, 853 (9th Cir.1985) (The district court should inform the defendant that “(1) twelve members of the community compose a…