United States v. Ricardo Rodriguez

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Ricardo Daniel Rodriguez challenges his conviction for misdemeanor assault in Indian country. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm the district court.

Rodriguez argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to request a jury instruction covering self-defense and defense of others. We disagree. We reach this issue on direct appeal despite the general rule precluding such review because the record is sufficiently developed to determine that Rodriguez’s counsel was not ineffective. See United States v. Benford, 574 F.3d 1228, 1231 (9th Cir.2009).

Rodriguez’s action of charging Tal-bott after Talbott backed away negates any claim of self-defense or defense of others. See Ninth Circuit Model Criminal Jury Instructions, 6.8, Self-Defense; see also Williams v. Woodford, 384 F.3d 567, 610-11 (9th Cir.2004), as amended (holding that counsel need not put on a defense that is unsupported by credible evidence).

*639 Rodriguez also contends that the Magistrate Judge abused his discretion by-admitting evidence concerning the shooting of the defendant and his companion. However, the fact that Talbott used his firearm and that the…

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I concur in part and dissent in part.

With respect to the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, I would follow our general rule, which is not to decide such a claim on direct review. United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir.2011). Rodriguez could bring this claim through a petition for a writ of error co-ram nobis. Holloway v. United States, 393 F.2d 731, 732 (9th Cir.1968). In my view, it is not entirely clear, without the presentation of additional evidence, that counsel’s performance could not have been deficient.

In all other respects, I concur fully.

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 09 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-30215

Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:10-po-00120-MHW-

v.

MEMORANDUM *

RICARDO DANIEL RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 6, 2012 ** Seattle, Washington

Before: NOONAN, GRABER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Appellant Ricardo Daniel Rodriguez challenges his conviction for

misdemeanor assault in Indian country. We have jurisdiction pursuant to

U.S.C. § 1291, and affirm the district court.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Rodriguez argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to request a jury

instruction covering self-defense and defense of others. We disagree. We…