United States v. Ronnie Theodore Walters

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 12337·309 F.3d 589·2002 WL 31409912·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10688·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 22424
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 28, 200201-50317California1,224 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schwarzer, J.

Ronnie Theodore Walters appeals the judgment and sentence after his conviction on two counts of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute at least 5 kg of cocaine and attempted possession of at least 5 kg of cocaine. 21 U.S.C. §§ 963 , 960, 952, 846, 841(a)(1), 853 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.

INTRODUCTION

Walters’ principal contention is that the district court violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice in refusing to grant his attorney pro hac vice status for his sentencing. Before reaching that issue, we consider Walters’ other contentions on appeal. He contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction, that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress wiretap evidence, in refusing to depart downward for Walters’ role in the offense, and in increasing his offense level by two levels for perjury, and that the asset forfeitures were unconstitutional and invalid. He advanced his contentions in conclusory fashion lacking evidentiary support and reasoned analysis. Having considered them, we find them to be without merit.

DENIAL OF APPLICATION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE.

In…

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.