Joseph

United States v. Joseph

Good Law
219 F. App'x 635
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 19, 2007No. 06-10270California450 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Deon Joseph was convicted pursuant to a guilty plea of importing cocaine into the United States, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a) and 960(b)(1), and attempt to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846. He challenges the voluntariness of his plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(2), and the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea based on the magistrate judge’s failure to advise him that he had ten days unconditionally to withdraw his guilty plea under Rule 11(d)(1).

Joseph argues that his plea was involuntary under Rule 11(b)(2) because the district court did not inquire sufficiently into whether the plea resulted from any promises. We review de novo the adequacy of a Rule 11 plea colloquy. United States v. Barragan-Espinoza, 350 F.3d 978, 981 (9th Cir.2003). Moreover, because Joseph did not raise this issue below, we review the alleged Rule 11 violation for plain error. Id.

The magistrate judge explained that the plea agreement did not include any promises by the government regarding “sentencing or anything else,” and also explained to Joseph that because he was an…

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.