United States v. Shawn Rice, 776 F.3d 1021

Shawn Rice indicted (Mar 3, 2009) for conspiracy to commit money laundering and money laundering; initially appeared and arraigned Mar 6, 2009.
At the Mar 6 proceeding Rice stated he would represent himself and consented to standby counsel; the magistrate appointed the federal public defender as counsel for the day and deferred ruling on self-representation.
The court struck 12 pro se pretrial motions while Rice was still officially represented; Rice later failed to appear at several hearings and was charged with failure to appear.
On July 28, 2009, during an initial appearance on a bench warrant, the district court granted Rice’s Faretta request, invited him to refile motions, and extended deadlines; Rice then proceeded pro se.
Rice was convicted after a two-day bench trial on all counts, sentenced to 98 months, restitution of $95,782, and forfeiture of $1,290,000; he appealed claiming denial of Faretta rights and Speedy Trial Act violations.
The government conceded that loss calculations included laundering that occurred before Rice joined the conspiracy, implicating Guideline relevant-conduct issues for sentencing, restitution, and forfeiture.

Issue	Rice's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether Rice was denied his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation between Mar 6 and Jul 28, 2009	Delay in granting Faretta and striking pro se motions deprived Rice of the right to control his defense; structural error	The initial appearance functioned as if Rice were pro se with standby counsel; later grant cured any error	No Sixth Amendment violation; no structural error (July 28 cure)
Whether the Speedy Trial Act was violated after Rice’s subsequent appearance following failure to appear	Trial occurred beyond 70 days after his reappearance, violating §3161	The 70-day clock restarted at the subsequent appearance; stipulated continuances excluded time	No Speedy Trial Act violation — trial commenced within allowable/ excluded period
Whether district court properly included pre-joining conspiracy conduct in loss amount for sentencing/restitution/forfeiture	Inclusion of pre-joining laundering inflated loss; invalid under Sentencing Guideline comment	Government conceded error	Sentence, restitution, and forfeiture vacated; remanded for recalculation and resentencing
Whether striking Rice’s pro se filings before Faretta hearing caused incurable prejudice	Striking motions and delay forced Rice to proceed with counsel he distrusted, undermining Faretta rights	Court’s later invitation to refile and extension put Rice in same position as if Faretta granted earlier	No prejudice shown; remedied by court’s July 28 actions

Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (recognizes Sixth Amendment right to self-representation)
McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 (permissible participation by standby counsel with pro se defendant’s approval)
Rothgery v. Gillespie County, 554 U.S. 191 (right to counsel attaches at first appearance where formal accusation and liberty restraints are imposed)
Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (Faretta analysis applies to critical stages; competency of waiver)
United States v. Gerritsen, 571 F.3d 1001 (defendant’s correlative rights to counsel and self-representation)
United States v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049 (requirement for a Faretta hearing once an unequivocal request is made)
United States v. Davila, 133 S. Ct. 2139 (structural-error discussion regarding denial of self-representation)