United States v. Daniel J. Burkhart

978 F.2d 716 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Daniel J. BURKHART, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-50254. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 2, 1992. * Decided Nov. 6, 1992. Before WALLACE, C.J., and TROTT and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM 1 Burkhart appeals from his conviction of conspiracy, securities fraud, wire fraud, and aiding and abetting, on the basis that the district court improperly denied his motion to dismiss the indictment as violative of due process because of preindictment delay. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, United States v. Gonzalez-Sandoval, 894 F.2d 1043, 1050 (9th Cir.1990) (Gonzalez-Sandoval ), and we affirm. 2 As a prerequisite to establishing a due process violation for preindictment delay,…