United States v. Horace Benson

Good Law
579 F.2d 508·1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 10274
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 197877-2770California1,460 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Benson appeals from his conviction of violating 18 U.S.C. § 922 (h)(1), receipt of a firearm shipped in interstate commerce by a person convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. The procedural posture of Benson’s appeal raises an important question concerning “an essential part of the [criminal justice] process,” the plea bargain. Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 261 , 92 S.Ct. 495, 498 , 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971). We vacate and remand.

I

On March 16, 1977, Benson was charged by indictment with violating section 922(h)(1). He thereafter pleaded not guilty and moved to suppress certain incriminatory statements he had previously made to federal agents. The motion was denied without a hearing. On June 17, 1977, Benson withdrew his original plea and entered a plea of guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea bargain. As part of the bargain, it was agreed that Benson would be given no more than three years’ incarceration and would be allowed to challenge on appeal the denial of the motion to suppress and to argue that his earlier state conviction did not satisfy the prior conviction element of section 922(h)(1). The district court accepted the guilty plea…

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.