United States v. Robert William Santillo

70 F.3d 121 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Robert William SANTILLO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50215. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 11, 1995. Decided Sept. 5, 1995. Before: BROWNING, NORRIS, and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Defendant-appellant Robert William Santillo argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at trial. Santillo also appeals the district court's denial of his motion for a new trial. We dismiss Santillo's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel without prejudice and affirm the district court's denial of his motion for a new trial. I. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel 3 We normally do not consider claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal because our review of trial counsel's effectiveness usually requires additional evidence not found in the trial record. United States v. Birges, 723 F.2d 666, 670…