United States v. Robert Eberle

MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated appeals, Robert Eberle (Robert) and Barbara Eberle (Barbara) each appeal from the 60-month sentences imposed following their guilty-plea convictions for securities fraud, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 77q(a) and 77x. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

In Appeal No. 14-10118, Robert challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to substitute counsel. We review for abuse of discretion, see United States v. Mendez-Sanchez, 563 F.3d 935, 942 (9th Cir.2009), and find none. The record reflects that Robert’s motion, made shortly before sentencing, was untimely; that the district court conducted a thorough inquiry; and that there was not an extensive conflict between Robert and trial counsel. See id. at 942-44 . Moreover, to the extent that Robert claims that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel, his claim is not ripe for consideration on direct appeal. See United States v. McKenna, 327 F.3d 830, 845 (9th Cir.2003).

Robert also argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it was disproportionate to the sentences received by his codefendants, and failed to account sufficiently…