Miranda-Martinez

United States v. Miranda-Martinez

Good Law
139 F. App'x 807
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 14, 2005No. 04-10609California283 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gregorio Miranda-Martinez pleaded guilty to unlawful reentry after deportation, 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a). He contends on appeal that his conviction should be vacated because the district court failed to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. We reject that contention and we affirm.

DISCUSSION

Miranda-Martinez relies on United States v. Vonn, 224 F.3d 1152, 1156 (9th Cir.2000) (applying harmless error review). That decision, however, was vacated by United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 59 , 122 S.Ct. 1043 , 152 L.Ed.2d 90 (2002), holding that a defendant who seeks relief for a Rule 11 violation must demonstrate plain error. The Supreme Court later clarified “that a defendant who seeks reversal of his conviction after a guilty plea, on the ground that the district court committed plain error under Rule 11, must show a reasonable probability that, but for the error, he would not have entered the plea.” United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74 , 124 S.Ct. 2333, 2340 , 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004).

Applying that standard, we conclude that no reversible error occurred. Miranda-Martinez does not argue he was prejudiced by the district court’s omissions and no…

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.