United States v. David Palmer

91 F.3d 156 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. David PALMER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50301. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 3, 1996. Decided July 8, 1996. Before: FLETCHER, BEEZER, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 David Palmer appeals his conviction of aiding and abetting the robbery of a credit union. Palmer argues that the district court erred by 1) denying the motions of his trial counsel to be relieved on the basis of attorney-client conflict, and 2) excluding as hearsay two tape-recorded conversations. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. I. BACKGROUND 3 In March 1992, Ronald Carrington robbed $1,440 from the Telephone Employee Credit Union of Riverside, California. Soon thereafter, the police captured Carrington in a car being driven by Palmer. Palmer claimed he had nothing to do with the robbery, maintaining he had run…