Khan

United States v. Khan

Good Law
286 F. App'x 458
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 28, 2008Nos. 05-50968, 06-50020California469 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Amanullah Khan appeals his conviction and 188-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea.

We will not reverse Khan’s conviction based on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 errors. The district judge committed two errors under Rule 11, but Khan has not met his burden of showing that but for the errors, he would not have entered the guilty plea. See United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74 , 124 S.Ct. 2333 , 159 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004). The district judge failed to advise Khan about the possibility of restitution. This error was harmless, however, because Khan was informed about a potential fine, and the restitution imposed by the district judge was less than the fine. See United States v. Gamma Tech Industries, Inc., 265 F.3d 917, 931 (9th Cir.2001). The district judge also failed to advise Khan at the second plea hearing about its obligation to apply the sentencing guidelines and that it has the discretion to depart from those guidelines. The was an error, but Khan has not shown that but for this error he would not have entered a guilty plea.

The judge did not err in imposing an 18-level increase for a loss of more than $5.7 million. There was sufficient…

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.