United States v. Paul Jay Rosenbluth

34 F.3d 1075 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Paul Jay ROSENBLUTH, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50760. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 3, 1994. * Decided Aug. 25, 1994. 1 Before: O'SCANNLAIN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and MERHIGE, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Paul Jay Rosenbluth (Rosenbluth) appeals the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss for preindictment delay and his conviction. We affirm. 4 A. Preindictment Delay in Violation of Due Process 5 On April 24, 1991, Rosenbluth was arrested for the Pasadena robbery and confessed to the Thousand Oaks robbery. However, he was not indicted on the Thousand Oaks robbery until almost one year later on April 3, 1992, after the state prosecution for the Pasadena robbery was complete. Rosenbluth claims that as a result of this preindictment delay, his due process rights were violated. We disagree. 6 A two-part test…