United States v. Alfred Davis Adams

995 F.2d 233 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Alfred Davis ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10323. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 10, 1993. Decided May 25, 1993. 1 Before REINHARDT, TROTT and RYMER, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM * 3 Alfred Davis Adams appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to rob a bank, 18 U.S.C. § 371 , and aiding and abetting a bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113 (a) & 2. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 4 * Adams first argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss for pre-indictment delay. We review the denial of the motion for abuse of discretion, and we review the finding of lack of actual prejudice for clear error. United States v. Huntley, 976 F.2d 1287, 1290 (9th Cir.1992). 5 Delay between a crime and an indictment is generally covered by the statute of limitations;…