United States v. Rick Cunningham, United States of America v. Rick Cunningham

103 F.3d 141 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Rick CUNNINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rick CUNNINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 93-50429, 95-50399. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 4, 1996. * Decided Nov. 19, 1996. 1 Before: BROWNING, THOMPSON, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Rick Cunningham is not entitled to a new trial. 4 Because Cunningham filed his new trial motion more than seven days after the jury found him guilty, the district court could examine only newly discovered, non-cumulative, relevant evidence. Fed.R.Crim.P. 33; United States v. Sarno, 73 F.3d 1470, 1507 (9th Cir.1995). Because Cunningham knew before or during trial that Robert Sobel had accused J.C. Miller, Edward Jamison, Stephen Gibbs, Paul Rapsorda, and Steve Rhambo of misconduct in unrelated cases, evidence of this misconduct is not newly…