Summary
In United States v. Speer, 388 F.2d 110 (9th Cir. 1968), appellant's assertion of nine instances of inadequate representation were rejected outright where there was no concomitant showing that any of the instances would have altered the result of the trial in appellant's favor.
Summary of this case from Ewing v. WilliamsOpinion
No. 21677.
January 24, 1968.
Martin F. Bloom, San Diego, Cal., for appellant.
Edwin L. Miller, Jr., U.S. Atty., Phillip W. Johnson, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for appellee.
Before BARNES and MERRILL, Circuit Judges, and CURTIS, District Judge.
Appellants, convicted of smuggling amphetamine tablets into the United States, list nine instances in which their appointed trial counsel might have acted otherwise than he did. They conclude that they did not have adequate assistance of counsel or a fair trial and that the District Court erred in not acting sua sponte on their behalf. We fail to see how action by trial counsel in any of these instances could have resulted in a favorable ruling or otherwise altered the result in appellants' favor. The cumulation adds neither weight nor substance. Nor do we think the district judge should on his own motion have granted a judgment of acquittal on behalf of either appellant.
Affirmed.