Jones

MEMORANDUM **

A jury found Antonio Jones guilty of interference with commerce by robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (a) (Hobbs Act), and use of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). Jones seeks a new trial, asserting the district court erred when it refused to suppress Jones’ confession, allowed evidence of eyewitness identifications, refused to grant a mistrial in response to the late disclosure by the prosecution of a government witness’ prior recorded statement, and instructed the jury that the requisite effect on interstate commerce under the Hobbs Act need only be de minimus. We affirm.

With regard to Jones’ confession, the district court adopted the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge, who found that Jones did not invoke his rights under Miranda to remain silent or have counsel present, but rather knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived these privileges. We find the district court did not clearly err in this regard. United States v. Doe, 819 F.2d 206, 209 (9th Cir.1985) (standard of review).

Jones also challenges the admission of testimony concerning an on-the-scene identification of Jones and a subsequent in-court…