United States v. Reginaldo Huerta
Opinion
Opinion
72 F.3d 136 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Reginaldo HUERTA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-30033. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 14, 1995. * Decided Dec. 15, 1995. Before: BOOCHEVER, FERNANDEZ, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Reginaldo Huerta (hereinafter "Reginaldo," to distinguish him from codefendants with the same last names) appeals the denial of a motion to withdraw made by his counsel on the same day the notice of appeal was filed with the district court. 3 Reginaldo's brief argues that the district court did not make a sufficient inquiry into the request to withdraw under U.S. v. Walker, 915 F.2d 480, 482 (9th Cir.1990). That case has no application, because, as we explain below, the district court lacked jurisdiction to decide the motion, and also because the motion in the case at bar was made by the attorney, not the defendant. The motion did not say…