Mungia

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant Frank Mungia was convicted of wire fraud and money laundering in connection with the “money leasing” operations of his company, Capital Enhancement Corporation (CEC). On appeal, he urges the reversal of his conviction on three grounds. First, he argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because one of his defense attorneys suffered either from actual conflicts of interest that likely had an adverse effect on his representation, or from potential conflicts of interest into which the district court failed to make adequate inquiry. Second, he claims that evidence concerning letter communications between Victor Kirkland and business broker Ray Elwood was improperly excluded pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 16. Third, he maintains that the government failed to adduce sufficient evidence to prove the scienter element of the charged offenses.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are generally not susceptible to resolution on direct appeal because they require the development of facts not in the record. United States v. Hanoum, 33 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir.1994); see also United…