Harris
United States v. Harris
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jeffrey Harris appeals his conviction by guilty plea and sentence for conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 371 , and bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344 . We affirm.
We review Harris’s challenge based on failure to comply with Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(1) for plain error, as he raises it for the first time on appeal. United States v. Monzon, 429 F.3d 1268, 1271 (9th Cir.2005). There was no plain error; the district court advised Hams of the applicable maximum sentences to the relevant charges. Cf. United States v. Barrios-Gutiemz, 218 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir.2000), superseded on reconsideration en banc by 255 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir.2001) (court never actually stated the maximum sentence); United States v. Jaramillo-Suarez, 857 F.2d 1368, 1372-73 (9th Cir.1988) (court failed to mention any maximum penalty); United States v. Roberts, 5 F.3d 365, 369 (9th Cir.1993) (court failed to state the maximum possible term of supervised release); Carter v. McCarthy, 806 F.2d 1373, *8 1376 (9th Cir.1986) (court failed to state the mandatory parole term). In addition, the district judge made clear during the colloquy that he could not tell Harris what his sentence was going to be. Finally, we note that Harris does…