United States v. Richter, No. 14-30003 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseAfter a bench trial, Appellant was convicted for felon in possession of a firearm. On appeal, Appellant argued that there was insufficient evidence that he possessed the firearm and that the district court erred by failing to call for closing arguments from the parties before rendering its guilty verdict. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction, holding (1) the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the conviction; and (2) waiver of the right to give a closing argument may be implicit and inferred from counsel’s conduct, and Appellant in this case implicitly waived his right to give a closing argument.
Court Description: Criminal Law. Affirming a conviction for felon in possession of a firearm, the panel held that waiver of the right to give a closing argument may be implicit and inferred from counsel’s conduct, so long as there was a meaningful opportunity to request argument and the trial judge does nothing to prevent counsel from giving a closing argument. The panel held that the defendant implicitly waived his right to give a closing argument in this case, and that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the conviction.
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.