Most of the defense arguments focused on Faretta issues. The opinion, however, does not really break new ground on anything. That said, if you are dealing with a Faretta issue, you should read this case.
There is another really interesting aspect of the opinion. On concession of error from the government, the Court vacated certain counts for insufficient evidence. Davina Chen pointed out to me the following from the Gov's brief:
Audette contends that there was insufficient evidence that his text messages to Moore (Counts 81-89) and his phone call to Warwick (Count 90), were transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce as required for a conviction of wire fraud. (Op Br. at 38-39.) The government agrees that there was insufficient evidence admitted at trial that the transmissions were “in interstate or foreign commerce” as required by this Court’s precedent. See United States v. Wright, 625 F.3d 583, 594 (9th Cir. 2010) (“criminal statutes punishing the transmission of the relevant material ‘in interstate or foreign commerce’ require the material itself to cross state lines.”).This is important because it highlights that the government must prove the wire communication actually travelled interstate.
One other thing that caught my attention: "We review the district court’s failure to grant a continuance for abuse of discretion 'even where, as here, no motion for continuance was made.'"
