United States v. Huey Carter

Good Law
795 F.3d 947·2015 WL 4529379·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13068
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 28, 201513-50164California4,010 words

Opinion

Opinion

Melloy, J.

Defendant Huey Carter timely filed a direct appeal following a guilty plea. He asserts he was under the influence of prescription drugs at the time he entered his plea. Carter asks us to vacate the plea because he contends the district court insufficiently inquired as to the effect of those drugs at his plea hearing. Without a more searching inquiry, Carter argues, the district court failed to fulfill its duty under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b) to ensure he entered the plea knowingly and voluntarily. Because the scope of the district court’s inquiry was constitutionally and procedurally sufficient, we affirm.

I

Huey Carter sold crack cocaine to a confidential informant in December 2010. A grand jury returned an indictment in April 2011, charging Carter with distributing crack cocaine. Carter was arrested and arraigned in- February 2012. He pleaded not guilty, and the court appointed a public defender to represent him.

A few weeks later, Carter asked the court to allow him to represent himself. A hearing on self-representation was set for March, but the parties stipulated to postponing the hearing date to April. At the April hearing, Carter explained he had…

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.