United States v. David Wayne Means
Opinion
Opinion
103 F.3d 142 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Wayne MEANS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-17138. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 18, 1996. * Decided Nov. 20, 1996. Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM ** Federal prisoner David Wayne Means appeals pro se the district court's denial of his second 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and other requests for relief. Means contends: 1) the evidence was insufficient to convict him of transporting forged checks in interstate commerce; 2) he was denied his right to testify because the district court intimidated him; 3) the district court neglected to give a jury instruction, as the court intended; 4) the imposition of restitution is now illegal because the government's theory justifying restitution 1 is no longer valid; and 5) the district court erroneously imposed a two-level increase in Mean's offense…