United States v. Alejandro Castanos Ruiz

87 F.3d 1325 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Alejandro Castanos RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 96-50033. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 3, 1996. Decided June 19, 1996. Before: WIGGINS, THOMPSON, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. ORDER 1 Appellant Ruiz was originally charged with possessing a listed chemical, allegedly knowing it would be used to manufacture a controlled substance. Because the government believed it could not adequately prove the knowledge element of this crime, however, the parties negotiated a plea agreement to a lesser charge, importing merchandise subject to seizure in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545 . Because the district court was not satisfied with the sentencing possibilities agreed to by the parties and presented by the agreement, however, the court allowed Ruiz to withdraw his plea; and the parties started over. This time, they negotiated a plea…