United States v. Richard Aichele

60 F.3d 835 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Richard AICHELE, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-10346. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 12, 1995. Decided June 30, 1995. 1 Before: GOODWIN, POOLE, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM * 3 This case is before us a second a time. We affirmed Aichele's conviction on direct appeal in United States v. Aichele, 941 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1991). Aichele now appeals from the district court's order denying a new trial. 4 Aichele's motion for a new trial asserted that Harold Otis St. John, a government witness at Aichele's trial, perjured himself. Aichele argues that (1) the government failed to disclose St. John's perjury to the defense, and (2) violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972) by withholding impeachment information from the defense. 5 After Aichele's conviction, defense…