United States of America v. Ladel Baptiste Harrison

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LADEL BAPTISTE HARRISON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-30334
D.C. No. 2:03-cr-00016-RHW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Robert H. Whaley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 24, 2013**
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Ladel Baptiste Harrison appeals pro se from the district court’s orders
denying his motion for DNA testing and his motion to stay proceedings. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Harrison contends that he is entitled to DNA testing of a firearm,
FILED
AUG 02 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-30334 2
ammunition, and keys under the Innocence Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3600. The
district court properly denied the motion because Harrison does not satisfy the
statute’s requirements. Based on the record, including Harrison’s own statements
regarding his possession of the firearm, Harrison has not identified a theory of
defense that would establish his actual innocence or shown how the proposed DNA
testing would produce new material evidence raising a reasonable probability that
he did not commit the offense of being a felon in possession of a firearm. See 18
U.S.C. § 3600(a)(6), (8).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Harrison’s motion
to stay the proceeding. Harrison’s contention that the district court judge was
biased is unpersuasive. We decline to reach Harrison’s remaining claims because
they are not properly before the court.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --