Dugan

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Kevin Dugan appeals from his conviction of charges related to his illegal use, production, and distribution of marijuana. For the following reasons, we affirm.

1. Defendant first argues that the government failed to abide by the Speedy Trial Act’s requirement that it bring him to trial within 70 days of his indictment. 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (c)(1). We review de novo the district court’s application of the Speedy Trial Act’s legal standards, and we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error. United States v. Alvarez-Perez, 629 F.3d 1053, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2010).

Defendant waived his Speedy Trial Act claim by failing to move to dismiss the indictment on that ground prior to trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3162 (a)(2) (“Failure of the defendant to move for dismissal prior to trial or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere shall constitute a waiver of the right to dismissal under this section.”). Although we have held that a Speedy Trial Act claim is preserved when a defendant himself moved to dismiss the indictment, even though his lawyer refused to do so, United States v. Hall, 181 F.3d 1057, 1060 (9th Cir.1999), we never have held that a Speedy…