United States v. Jose Garcia

979 F.2d 856 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jose GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-50660. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 6, 1992. * Decided Nov. 17, 1992. Before BEEZER, KOZINSKI and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 * We needn't determine whether the district court should have granted Garcia's motion to substitute counsel, because the court denied the motion only after learning that the Federal Defender's Office had reassigned the case to a different lawyer (Maria Valdez). Garcia got his new lawyer, and has no basis for complaint. 1 II 3 Valdez moved for a continuance on July 5--four days before the trial was scheduled to start--on the grounds that (1) the "defense investigation need[ed] to be completed" and (2) the defense wouldn't have time to verify the transcripts of certain tapes that the government was going to turn over. E.C.R. at 11. The district court…