United States v. Justin Richardson

Good Law
580 F. App'x 526
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 19, 201411-10346California301 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

In a published opinion filed herewith, we resolve Richardson’s constitutional challenges to the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. Here, we resolve his challenge to his sentence. Richardson argues that the district court should not have assigned him one criminal history point for his 2000 misdemeanor conviction because he did not have counsel during the proceeding and the conviction resulted in a sentence of time served.

The Sixth Amendment provides that an indigent criminal defendant may not be sentenced to a term of imprisonment without the assistance of appointed counsel. Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367, 374 , 99 S.Ct. 1158 , 59 L.Ed.2d 383 (1979). However, “once the government establishes the fact of a conviction, the burden rests on the defendant to show that the conviction was unconstitutional.” United States v. Wahid, 614 F.3d 1009, 1017 (9th Cir.2010) (citing United States v. Newman, 912 F.2d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir.1990)). “A defendant cannot carry this burden ‘merely by pointing to a silent or ambiguous record.’” United States v. Dominguez, 316 F.3d 1054, 1056 (9th Cir.2003) (quoting United States v. Mulloy, 3 F.3d 1337, 1339 (9th Cir.1993)).

The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.