Fernandez-Castillo

United States v. Fernandez-Castillo

Good Law
62 F. App'x 779
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 8, 2003No. 01-30398; D.C. No. CR-00-00084-RFCCalifornia516 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant Rigoberto Femandez-Castillo (“Fernandez”) challenges his conviction of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Fernandez asserts his rights under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 , were violated and contends the district court erred in allowing testimony at trial of his prior bad acts. We affirm.

I

The Speedy Trial Act requires the trial of a defendant to “commence within seventy days from the filing date (and making public) of the information or indictment, or from the date the defendant has appeared before a judicial officer of the court.” 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (c)(1). If required by the ends of justice, the court may grant a continuance and declare certain days excludable from the seventy-day Speedy Trial clock. Id. § 3161(h)(8)(A). In determining whether the ends of justice warrant delaying a trial, one factor the court must consider is whether the failure to grant a continuance would deny defense counsel “the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation.” Id. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).

*780 On February 14, 2001, Fernandez moved for a continuance. The district court granted the continuance the…

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.