Robles

United States v. Robles

Good Law
44 F. App'x 832
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 16, 2002No. 01-10036; D.C. No. CR-98-00456-SOMCalifornia391 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Timothy Jon Robles appeals his 139-month sentence following his guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

Robles contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to disqualify the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) prosecuting his case and by not holding an evidentiary hearing on the mo *833 tion. 1 We review for abuse of discretion. United States v. Plesinski, 912 F.2d 1033, 1035 (9th Cir.1990) (motion to disqualify); United States v. Houston, 217 F.3d 1204, 1206-07 (9th Cir.2000) (evidentiary hearing).

Robles’ motion to disqualify the AUSA was based on his claim that the prosecutor was withholding a substantial assistance departure recommendation, see U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, based on the AUSA’s bias against Robles and his attorney. Because Robles did not sufficiently support his motion, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion without an eviden-tiary hearing. In light of the AUSA’s plausible explanation that his decision not to recommend a departure was based on the fact…

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.