United States v. Luis Manuel Rodriguez-Lara

Caution
421 F.3d 932·2005 WL 2045777·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 18427
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 26, 200504-10113California8,410 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Defendant-appellant Luis Manuel Rodriguez-Lara (“Rodriguez”), an alien convicted of reentry after deportation, appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to appoint an expert to assist him in pursuing his equal protection and fair cross-section challenges to the composition of the jury pool in the Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California. Rodriguez also claims that the district court erred in its application of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and that the court violated his Sixth Amendment rights by enhancing his sentence in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey and its progeny.

Given the extent of the fair cross-section showing Rodriguez was able to develop even without the help of an expert, we hold that under the circumstances reasonably competent counsel would have required the services of an expert for a paying client, and the lack of an expert prejudiced Rodriguez. The district court therefore abused its discretion in denying Rodriguez’s motion for the appointment of an expert. Although Rodriguez’s Sixth Amendments rights were not violated by the judge’s use of a prior conviction to enhance Rodriguez’s sentence, the district court committed plain error 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.