United States v. Dennis Paul Timmins

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 7968·301 F.3d 974·2002 WL 1560585·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6344·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 14386
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 17, 200200-30224California4,656 words

Opinion

Opinion

Shadur, J.

Dennis Timmins (“Timmins”) appeals his jury conviction on three counts of unarmed bank robbery, one count of armed bank robbery and a firearms offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924 (c)(1) and 2113(a) and (d), on which he is currently serving a sentence of just under 30 years — 354 months. Timmins contends (1) that he was incompetent to stand trial, (2) that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions for armed bank robbery, carrying a firearm in a crime of violence and one of the unarmed bank robbery counts and (3) that his sentences for the unarmed bank robberies should be vacated in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Because the district court inquired inadequately into Timmins’ ability to assist properly in his own defense, we remand for a determination whether Timmins’ decision to go to trial rather than to accept an offered plea bargain was made competently.

If it is held on remand that Timmins’ decision was in fact a competent one, his conviction will stand because there was sufficient evidence for a rational trier of fact to find him guilty on all counts beyond a reasonable doubt. In that respect,…

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.