United States v. Narinder Pal Singh Mahal

45 F.3d 437 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Narinder Pal Singh MAHAL, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10137. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 14, 1994. Decided Dec. 16, 1994. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, PREGERSON and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM 1 Mahal appeals from his conviction following his guilty plea to bribing a public official in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 201 (b)(1)(C). Mahal argues that the district court failed to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(e)(2) and erroneously denied his motions to withdraw his guilty plea as involuntary because his counsel was ineffective. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 2 We review a district court's compliance with Rule 11 de novo. Because the issue is purely legal and the facts are fully developed, we may decide the question even if not raised in the district…