United States v. Ricardo Solorzano-Rivera, AKA Fernando Solorzano-Rivera

Good Law
368 F.3d 1073·2004 WL 1124822·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 10062
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 21, 200403-10284California3,082 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hall, J.

Ricardo Solorzano-Rivera appeals his conviction of illegal reentry into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . He contends that the government violated his rights under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161 and 3162, and that the district court erred in instructing the jury that the defendant had the burden of proving duress by a preponderance of the evidence.

We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the district court. So-lorzano’s arguments concerning the Speedy Trial Act fail. First, not more than 30 days elapsed between his arrest and indictment. The speedy trial clock was tolled under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(l)(I) because the court was considering the plea agreement from October 16, 2002, to January 21, 2003. Second, not more than 70 days elapsed between Solorzano’s indictment and trial. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3161®, Solorzano was deemed indicted on January 24, 2003 — the date on which the order allowing him to withdraw his guilty plea became final — and his trial commenced on February 25, 2003. In addition, the district court’s jury instructions regarding duress were proper. Solorzano bore the burden of establishing duress because his duress claim was…

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.