United States v. Jose Rodriguez

Good Law
487 F. App'x 370
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 9, 201211-50502California590 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

After a jury trial, Jose Luis Rodriguez was found guilty of attempted entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) and (b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Rodriguez raises three issues on appeal. We address each in turn, and affirm.

Rodriguez claims the district court violated the Speedy Trial Act or abused its discretion in denying his motion for a continuance of the trial after the superseding indictment was returned. We review application of the Speedy Trial Act de novo and factual findings for clear error. United States v. Nelson, 137 F.3d 1094, 1108 (9th Cir.1998). The Speedy Trial Act does not create a right to an additional thirty days for trial after a superseding indictment is filed. United States v. Rojas-Contreras, 474 U.S. 231 , 106 S.Ct. 555 , 88 L.Ed.2d 537 (1985). The district court did not violate the Speedy Trial Act because over thirty days passed from Rodriguez’s initial appearance with counsel on April 11, 2011, until his trial on August 23, 2011. See United States v. Flores-Sanchez, 477 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir.2007) (superseding indictment changing charge from illegal reentry to attempted illegal reentry did not…

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.