United States v. George A. Hargrove

15 F.3d 1092 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. George A. HARGROVE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-35196. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 17, 1993. * Decided Feb. 3, 1994. Before: CHOY, GOODWIN, and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 George A. Hargrove appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. He contends that his sentence should be vacated and that he should be resentenced by a different judge because the sentencing judge had previously dismissed his social security case. He argues that the district judge should sua sponte have recused himself from sentencing and from considering the section 2255 motion. We reject these arguments and we affirm. 3 Recusal of a judge is required only upon a showing of bias or prejudice from an extrajudicial source. Taylor v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., 993 F.2d 710 , 712 (9th Cir.1993), cert.…