United States v. Donovan C. Davis

15 F.3d 1091 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donovan C. DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-30430. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 1, 1993. * Decided Jan. 4, 1994. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, WRIGHT, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Donovan Davis appeals his conviction and sentence for attempt to manufacture methamphetamine. He contends that the court erred in several ways. 3 (1) The district court found that there was a plea agreement. 4 Davis asserts that his guilty plea was entered pursuant to a purported agreement, but that the parties failed to have a meeting of the minds. The existence of a plea agreement is a question of fact subject to review for clear error. United States v. Helmandollar, 852 F.2d 498, 501 (9th Cir.1988). A plea agreement is a contract and is measured by contract principles. See United States v. Goroza, 941 F.2d 905, 909 (9th Cir.1991).…