United States v. Ernest Bernard Moore

963 F.2d 381 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ernest Bernard MOORE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10082. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 11, 1992. * Decided May 18, 1992. Before BOOCHEVER, REINHARDT and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Moore raises five issues on appeal, none of which requires reversal. 3 A. In the district court, Moore did not contend that the court should consider what he did after the original sentencing. In fact, Moore's counsel specifically requested that the court not take such matters into account. As such, Moore cannot now raise this argument. See United States v. Edwards, 800 F.2d 878, 884 (9th Cir.1986) ("Absent exceptional circumstances, this court will not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal."). In any event, the court did not abuse its discretion; it sentenced Moore within the statutory limits. Furthermore, Moore likely would…