United States v. Jesus Antonio Partida-Parra

Jesus Antonio Partida-Parra appeals his conviction on four counts relating to heroin distribution and weapons possession. Par-tida-Parra claims that the district court abused its discretion by setting aside his guilty plea to a lesser charge of misdemeanor possession after the plea had been accepted by the court.

FACTS

On December 17, 1986, Partida-Parra was indicted for possession and conspiracy to possess heroin with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 846 and for using and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e). These charges cumulatively carried a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years and a maximum of 45.

During initial plea negotiations, Partida-Parra’s counsel, George Siddell, indicated that his client would only plead guilty to a misdemeanor, so as not to destroy his eligibility for immigration amnesty. However, Assistant U.S. Attorney Larry Burns maintained that he would only accept a plea to a felony.

On February 2, 1987, Siddell discussed a plea agreement with AUSA Phillip Hal-pern, who was standing in for Burns. Apparently, a plea agreement was reached. The same day, Halpern prepared, and Burns signed, an information…

dissenting:

Contrary to the majority’s assertion, the distinction between the district court’s power to rescind a plea agreement and its power to vacate a guilty plea is pivotal. The district court had power to rescind the agreement. After the court exercised that power, but before it vacated the plea, the defendant was subject to sentencing on the misdemeanor count and prosecution on the felony counts in the original indictment. The Double Jeopardy Clause did not bar the prosecution. Therefore, the district court’s decision to vacate the guilty plea to the misdemeanor count, if error, was harmless since the defendant’s situation was improved by the act.

A. Power to Rescind Plea Agreement

Several circuits have recognized that the government can be freed from its obligations under a plea agreement after a defendant has entered a guilty plea pursuant to the agreement. See United States v. Verrusio, 803 F.2d 885, 887-89 (7th Cir.1986); United States v. Reardon, 787 F.2d 512, 515-16 (10th Cir.1986); United States v. Simmons, 537 F.2d 1260, 1261-62 (4th Cir.1976); United States v. Nathan, 476 F.2d 456, 459 (2d Cir.1973); United States v. McCarthy, 445 F.2d 587, 591 (7th Cir.1971).…

859 F.2d 629 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus Antonio PARTIDA-PARRA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 87-5295. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 3, 1988. Decided Sept. 20, 1988. D. Steven McEvers, Newport Beach, Cal., for defendant-appellant. Larry A. Burns, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. Before HUG, FLETCHER and FARRIS, Circuit Judges. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge: 1 Jesus Antonio Partida-Parra appeals his conviction on four counts relating to heroin distribution and weapons possession. Partida-Parra claims that the district court abused its discretion by setting aside his guilty plea to a lesser charge of misdemeanor possession after the plea had been accepted by the court. FACTS 2 On December 17, 1986, Partida-Parra was indicted for possession and conspiracy to possess heroin with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. Secs. 841 (a)(1), 846 and for using and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924 (c). These charges cumulatively carried a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years and a maximum of…