James

United States v. James

Good Law
98 F. App'x 648
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 18, 2004No. 02-10591California825 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Julie D. James pled guilty to using a telephone to facilitate a conspiracy to distribute in excess of 100 grams of heroin. James subsequently moved to withdraw her guilty plea based primarily on the sentence her husband and co-defendant, Michael Savage, received. As an alternative remedy to this perceived disparity, James requested a two-level downward departure. The district court denied the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, and did not address James’s request for a downward departure. James challenges her sentence and also contends, for the first time, that her plea colloquy failed to comport with the requirements of Rule 11.

James pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, and surrendered her “right to challenge any sentence within the statutory maximum, or the manner in which it was determined, including, but not limited to, a sentence that [she] perceives to be an incorrect application of the Guidelines.”

Contemporaneously with James’s plea, the government filed, and Savage pled guilty to, a one-count information charging him with “conspiring to knowingly and intentionally distribute and possess with intent to distribute 99 grams of heroin, a Schedule I…

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.