United States v. Oscar Arango-Forero

Good Law
99 F.3d 1147·1996 WL 612742·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 40323
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 199695-50427California300 words

Opinion

Opinion

99 F.3d 1147 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Oscar ARANGO-FORERO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-50427. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 9, 1996. * Decided Oct. 21, 1996. Before: BRUNETTI, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Appellee argues that this court lacks jurisdiction to review defendant's conviction. The court disagrees. Appellee argued the merits fully in its brief and has therefore not been prejudiced by defendant's mistake. United States v. Shin, 953 F.2d 559, 560 (9th Cir.1992); aff'd sub nom. Jung v. United States, 988 F.2d 120 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 961 (1993). 3 Defendant argues that his guilty pleas should be vacated because the court did not advise him of his future inability to withdraw his guilty plea once entered. Defendant's substantial rights were not affected in that the district court sentenced defendant within the range expressed…

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.