United States v. E.J. Conner, United States of America v. Albert Lee Span

34 F.3d 1074 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. E.J. CONNER, Defendant-Appellant UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albert Lee SPAN, Defendant-Appellant Nos. 93-50221, 93-50222. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 2, 1994. Decided Aug. 25, 1994. MEMORANDUM * Before: BROWNING, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 E.J. Conner and Albert Lee Span appeal from their jury convictions on two counts of drug trafficking, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions (Conner), that one of the defense attorneys was ineffective (Span), and that the district court erred by denying a motion for mistrial (Span). I. Conner 2 Relying principally on United States v. Bautista-Avila, 6 F.3d 1360 (9th Cir.1993) and United States v. Penagos, 823 F.2d 346 (9th Cir.1987), Conner argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to convict him of…