United States v. Pierre Stuckey

47 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Pierre STUCKEY, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50043. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted: Feb. 7, 1995. * Decided: Feb. 10, 1995. 1 Before: BRUNETTI and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and SHADUR, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 On March 5, 1993, Pierre Stuckey (Stuckey) was convicted of unarmed robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2113 (a) and armed robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2113 (a)(d). On July 8, 1993, with the assistance of new counsel Stuckey filed a motion for a new trial, which the district court denied. Stuckey now appeals those convictions and the district court's denial of his motion for a new trial. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and affirm. I. 4 On January 17, 1992, three men entered the Bank of America located at 23800 South Vermont Avenue, Harbor City, California (Harbor City bank). Two of the…