United States v. Roberto Nicolas Castro

Bad Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 11395·972 F.2d 1107·1992 WL 194758·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 18736·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7079
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 17, 199291-50369California2,946 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiggins, J.

OVERVIEW

Roberto Castro appeals from the district court’s judgment following a jury verdict against him for conspiracy and five counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. He argues that: 1) the district court abused its discretion in refusing to allow him to substitute new counsel; 2) his convictions are not supported by sufficient evidence; 3) the use of the amended Sentencing Guidelines in his case was a violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause; and 4) the district court erred in increasing his offense level for being a leader of the conspiracy. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part and reverse in part.

DISCUSSION

I. The District Court did not Abuse its Discretion in Denying Castro’s Motion to Substitute Counsel

Castro claims that the district court erred in refusing to permit him to substitute counsel prior to trial. A district court’s refusal to substitute counsel is reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Schaff, 948 F.2d 501, 503 (9th Cir.1991). There are three elements which must be examined in reviewing a district court’s denial of a substitution motion: (1) the timeliness of the motion; (2)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.