United States v. David Trujillo
Opinion
Opinion
101 F.3d 706 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 TRUJILLO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-50457. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 8, 1996. * Decided Nov. 13, 1996. Before: BROWNING, THOMPSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 David Trujillo appeals from his conviction on two counts of unarmed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 Trujillo first argues the district court erred by refusing to allow his counsel to refresh a government witness's memory with a defense investigator's notes. Counsel sought to impeach Troy Nasco, a witness who identified Trujillo as the robber in one robbery. During cross-examination, Nasco testified he never told anyone that the robber was wearing a hat. The district court prohibited defense counsel from refreshing Nasco's memory with the investigator's notes…