Valerdi-Melgarejo

United States v. Valerdi-Melgarejo

Good Law
11 F. App'x 796
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 30, 2001No. 99-50405; D.C. No. CR-98-00149-AHS-01California730 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Eduardo Valerdi-Melgarejo appeals the judgment and sentence entered against *797 him pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 for illegal reentry after deportation. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we will not recount it here.

I

We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of a request for substitute counsel. United States v. Musa, 220 F.3d 1096, 1102 (9th Cir.2000). In reviewing the district court’s exercise of discretion, three factors are considered: (1) the timeliness of the motion and the extent of resulting inconvenience or delay; (2) the adequacy of the court’s inquiry into the defendant’s complaint; and (3) whether the conflict between the defendant and his attorney was so great that it resulted in a total lack of communication preventing an adequate defense. Id.

Valerdi-Melgarejo’s motion, made two weeks before trial, was timely given the circumstances. See United States v. Moore, 159 F.3d 1154, 1161 (9th Cir.1998) (two weeks not the “eve" of trial,” and motion was timely). The district court made an adequate inquiry by allowing the defendant “to list all concerns which he had about his counsel.” United States v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.