United States v. Shanita Hampton

MEMORANDUM

Shanita Monique Hampton appeals from her sentence for knowingly distributing crack cocaine. We affirm her sentence.

Hampton’s waiver of her right to appeal certain issues is valid. Although the district court erred under Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c) by having the prosecutor read into the record the plea agreement’s appellate waiver provision, see United States v. Ma, 290 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir.2002), because Hampton failed to ob ject in the district court, we review for plain error. United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 58 , 122 S.Ct. 1043 , 152 L.Ed.2d 90 (2002). Hampton signed an informed waiver, and affirmed that she was waiving her right to appeal when specifically asked by the district court. Hampton “has failed to show that the error seriously affected the fairness or integrity of her plea.” Ma, 290 F.3d at 1005 .

Nor did the district court abuse its discretion in imposing a 92-month sentence. United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc). Hampton accepts that the Pre-Sentence Report properly calculated the offense level and criminal history category producing a sentencing range under the Guidelines of 92 to 115 months. She argues that the Supreme…