Farmer

United States v. Farmer

Good Law
171 F. App'x 670
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 17, 2006No. 05-10393California256 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Lovina Farmer appeals from her guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to import methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a), 963, and 960(b)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Farmer contends that the district court erred in denying her motion to withdraw her guilty plea. We review for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Ortegar-Ascanio, 376 F.3d 879, 883 (9th Cir.2004).

First, Farmer contends that the change in law announced by the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), rendered her guilty plea unknowing and involuntary. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Pacheco-Navarette, 432 F.3d 967, 969-970 (9th Cir. 2005).

Next, Farmer contends that her plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically, Farmer contends that she was not shown the plea agreement until the day of her plea hearing, did not understand why she was in court the day she entered her plea, was pressured to plead guilty to prevent the prosecution of her son, and was promised a lower sentence than the one she received. However, the plea…

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.