United States v. Aaron Hicks

48 F.3d 1229 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Aaron HICKS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-30269. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 15, 1995. * Decided Feb. 23, 1995. Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Aaron Hicks appeals his conviction following a jury trial for various drug offenses. Hicks argues that the prosecutor acted improperly by offering Hicks a package deal plea bargain with Hicks' father. Hicks also argues that the district court should have ordered a mistrial after the defendants' outbursts at trial. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and affirm. 3 This case involved seventeen defendants, including Hicks and his father, Aaron Beard. The government entered plea agreement with twelve defendants and discharged three others. The government offered Hicks a plea bargain, which Hicks accepted; however, at the change of plea hearing,…