United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Ronald Lee Ball, Defendant-appellant, 79 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 1996)
Annotate this CaseBefore: GOODWIN, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Ronald Lee Ball appeals pro se the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his conviction and sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Ball contends that his conviction and sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 for possession with the intent to distribute one kilogram of cocaine is not supported by sufficient evidence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we review de novo. See Frazer v. United States, 18 F.3d 778, 781 (9th Cir. 1994). We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.1
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Ball contends for the first time in this appeal that the district court was without jurisdiction to try him separately from his co-defendant Ruelas-Villalobos. Although ordinarily this court need not address claims which the petitioner failed to raise in the district court, we explicitly reject Ball's jurisdictional claim. See 18 U.S.C. § 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
