United States v. Henry Munoz Roman

70 F.3d 121 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Henry Munoz ROMAN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-30013. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 24, 1995. * Decided Nov. 3, 1995. Before: BEEZER, THOMPSON, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Henry Munoz Roman appeals his conviction following a guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922 (g)(1). Roman contends that the district court erred by failing to fully comply with the requirements of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 following the rejection of his plea agreement. Roman also contends that the district court coerced him into renewing his guilty plea. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 Roman contends that the district court was required to repeat the Rule 11 advisements before Roman decided whether to withdraw his guilty plea. This contention lacks merit. 4 We review…