United States v. Patrick Harris

36 F.3d 1103 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Patrick HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10016. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 20, 1994. * Decided Sept. 22, 1994. Before: SNEED, WIGGINS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 In this pre-Guidelines case, Patrick Harris appeals pro se the district court's denial of his Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(a) motion to correct his sentence of twenty-five years for various RICO offenses in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1962 . 1 Harris contends that: (1) his sentence was illegal because it exceeded the statutory maximum penalty for the offense; (2) he was denied the right to due process and access to the courts because he was not present during the correction of his sentence or the denial of his Rule 35 motion; and (3) the district judge deprived him of fair and impartial consideration of his Rule 35 motion. We have jurisdiction under 28…