United States v. Hardeep Singh

MEMORANDUM

Hardeep Singh appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to discharge counsel. He also appeals his 84-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute MDMA/Ecstasy and BZP, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), -and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 . We affirm.

1. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Singh's motion to discharge counsel. See United States v. Mendez-Sanchez, 563 F.3d 935, 942 (9th Cir.2009). To make this determination, we examine "1) the timeliness of the motion; 2) the adequacy of the district court's inquiry into the defendant's complaint; and 3) whether the asserted conflict was so great as to result in a complete breakdown in communication and a consequent inability to present a defense." United States v. Prime, 431 F.3d 1147, 1154 (9th Cir.2005). Singh's motion was filed late and did not explain any substantial problem with his counsel, and the district court conducted an adequate inquiry.

2. Singh contends the district court erred in its application of the Sentencing Guidelines by (1) attributing to him drugs from a transaction in which he was not involved, and (2)…