United States v. Marco Vargas

974 F.2d 1344 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Marco VARGAS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-50546. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 21, 1992. * Decided Sept. 2, 1992. 1 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, CR 91-232-HLH; Harry L. Hupp, District Judge, Presiding. 2 C.D.Cal. 3 AFFIRMED. 4 Before TANG and CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judges, and SHUBB, District Judge. ** 5 MEMORANDUM *** 6 Marco Vargas appeals his conviction, arguing that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right of compulsory process because the prosecutor intimidated one of his witnesses into refusing to testify. Because Vargas has failed to make a prima facie showing of such prosecutorial misconduct, we affirm. ANALYSIS 7 Vargas claims that the prosecutor's alleged threat to a possible defense witness violated Vargas' Sixth Amendment right of compulsory process, and…