United States v. Daniel Spencer

Good Law
598 F. App'x 514
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 17, 201513-10663California441 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Defendant/Appellant Daniel Spencer pleaded guilty to two counts of mail fraud in connection with a mortgage fraud scheme. The plea agreement contained a broad waiver of appellate rights, permitting him to appeal only if the district court imposed a sentence in excess of the applicable Guidelines range. After the plea hearing, but before sentencing, Spencer moved to withdraw his guilty plea, and the district court denied the motion. Spencer now appeals.

Spencer’s waiver of all appellate rights encompasses the right to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See United States v. Jeronimo, 398 F.3d 1149, 1153-54 (9th Cir.2005), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Jacobo Castillo, 496 F.3d 947 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc). Spencer’s arguments that the appeal waiver is unenforceable because his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary are without merit.

First, even if the Government’s reminder during the plea colloquy that Spencer’s statements were subject to the “penalties of perjury” could be construed as a threat, see Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 493 , 82 S.Ct. 510 , 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962), the record belies 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.