United States v. Gary M. Dawson
Opinion
Opinion
62 F.3d 1426 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Gary M. DAWSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10634. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 2, 1995. * Decided Aug. 8, 1995. Before: ALARCON, FERNANDEZ, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Gary M. Dawson, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his motion for a new trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33. Dawson was convicted, following a jury trial, for theft of government property and conspiracy to defraud the United States. 1 Dawson contends that he should have been granted a new trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 on the basis of newly discovered evidence. We affirm the district court's decision. A. Appellate Jurisdiction 3 Filing a timely notice of appeal is a necessary prerequisite to the exercise of appellate jurisdiction. See Vernon v. Heckler, 811 F.2d 1274, 1276 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Fed. R. App. P. 3 (c)…