United States v. Ronnie Fekrat

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-Appellant Ronnie Fekrat appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for a new trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, as well as its order denying his application for appointment of counsel in connection with the Rule 33 motion. Fekrat contends that the district court erred in finding that his motion was not based on newly discovered evidence. He also asserts that the district court failed to adequately explain its reasons for denying his application for appointment of counsel.

We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Fekrat’s motion was untimely under Rule 33 because it was not based on evidence that was newly discovered after the trial. United States v. Berry, 624 F.3d 1031, 1042 (9th Cir.2010); Fed.R.Crim.P. 33(b)(2) (“Any motion for a new trial grounded on any reason other than newly discovered evidence must be filed within 14 days after the verdict or finding of guilty.”). Fekrat’s motion presented two claims. The first was that the government overstated at trial the volume of phone calls between Fekrat and a co-schemer, Johnson. The government, however, produced the relevant telephone records…