United States v. Frank Andy Munoz

977 F.2d 593 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Frank Andy MUNOZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-50653. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 22, 1992. * Decided Sept. 28, 1992. Before GOODWIN, D.W. NELSON and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Frank A. Munoz appeals his conviction, following a jury trial, for four counts of bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a)(d). Counsel for Munoz filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), which identifies three possible issues for review: (1) whether the district court erred by denying Munoz' request to continue the trial because counsel was trying another case the same week as Munoz' trial was scheduled to begin; (2) whether the district court erred by requiring Munoz to show his neck tattoo and to wear a jacket worn by the bank robber, and (3) whether a jury instruction on eye-witness…