Case ID: f-appx_332/html/0606-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charlie WYNE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-15539
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Sept. 10, 2009.
    Richard F. Della Fera, Entin & Della Fera, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before CARNES, WILSON and COX, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Charlie Wyne appeals his convictions for possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon; possession with intent to distribute at least five grams or more of cocaine base; and knowingly carrying a firearm and ammunition during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime. Wyne argues the district court abused its discretion when it denied his request for a recess, which prevented him from presenting testimony from a defense witness.

The parties agree the district court’s denial of this motion for a recess is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. However, we are precluded “from reviewing an issue raised on appeal if it has been waived through the doctrine of invited error.” United States v. Brannan, 562 F.3d 1300, 1306 (11th Cir.2009) (emphasis and citation omitted). The “doctrine of invited error is implicated when a party induces or invites the district court into making an error.” Id (quoting United States v. Stone, 139 F.3d 822, 838 (11th Cir.1998)).

We do not find the court abused its discretion when it refused Wyne’s request for a recess. But even if the court erred, Wyne invited the error of which he now complains. During trial, a defense witness failed to appear at her scheduled time of 9:00 a.m. Wyne told the court that he would exclude her as a witness if she did not arrive by 10:00 a.m. (R.6-114 at 21.) After Wyne’s defense witness failed to arrive by his self-imposed deadline, the district court proceeded with the trial. Accordingly, we affirm Wyne’s convictions and sentences.

AFFIRMED.