Morales

United States v. Morales

Good Law
5 F. App'x 730
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 9, 2001No. 99-30197; D.C. No. CR-98-00508-3-HJFCalifornia541 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant, Marcos Morales (“Morales”), appeals his convictions and sentences for armed bank robbery and use of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113 and 922(c)(1). The district court’s inquiry into the voluntariness of Morales’ confession comports with the requirements of Rule 11. However, the district court erred in its calculation of restitution. For these reasons, we affirm in part and vacate and remand in part.

I.

Morales first argues that he should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because the district court conducted an inadequate plea colloquy. Specifically, he argues that, because the district court failed to inquire whether the Government’s promise not to prosecute his common-law wife may have exerted undue influence upon him, his guilty plea was not “knowing and voluntary.”

We have stated that “governmental threats of criminal sanctions against relatives are relevant to the voluntariness determination.” Sanchez v. United States, 50 F.3d 1448, 1455 (9th Cir.1995). In this *731 case, the district judge and Morales had dialogue sufficient to show that his confession was knowing and voluntary:

“Courts generally consider such responses to be…

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.