Vizcarra

United States v. Vizcarra

Good Law
134 F. App'x 161
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 10, 2005Nos. 04-10116, 04-10132; D.C. Nos. CR-02-00048-2-MCE, CR-02-00048-1-MCECalifornia890 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

We affirm the district court’s denial of defendants’ separate requests for continuances, the striking of Jack Perkett’s testimony, and the increase in Roberto Vizcarra’s sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 851 . We remand so that the district court may determine whether to resentence the defendants under this court’s en banc decision in United States v. Ameline.

1. Defendants’ Requests for Continuances

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendants’ eve-of-trial requests for continuances. Although the court did not make a detailed summary of reasons for its denial, the record reflects that over the life of the case the district court exercised care and patience with respect to the defendants’ rights. 2 The record shows that over a year before trial, the district court provided both defendants with new counsel upon their request, that the trial date had been set for some time without any objection that counsel needed time to prepare, and that defendants had indicated satisfaction with their attorneys at the pretrial conference six weeks before trial. The district court did not err by finding that defendants were attempting to manipulate the court’s…

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.