United States of America v. Alan M. Bartlett

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ALAN M. BARTLETT,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 21-30190
D.C. No. 3:13-cr-00044-RRB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Ralph R. Beistline, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 15, 2022**
Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
Alan M. Bartlett appeals pro se the district court’s order denying his
“Motion to Allow Limited Contact While No-Contact Order is in Effect.” We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Bartlett contends that the district court violated his right to due process by
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Appellant’s motions for oral
argument are, therefore, denied.
FILED
NOV 23 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-30190
denying him permission to contact certain trial witnesses despite a 2015 no-contact
order. We disagree. The district court had the authority to issue and maintain the
no-contact order, see Wheeler v. United States, 640 F.2d 1116, 1123-24 (9th Cir.
1981), and Bartlett has identified no meritorious basis upon which the order should
be lifted or modified.
Appellant is informed that the docket is correct.
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --