June 9, 2005
A plea/sentencing ruling of note from the 9th
What a day for appellate court sentencing decisions: the Booker pipeline is flowing, the NY high court is dodging Apprendi, and the First Circuit talks of state/federal disparities. To all this appellate fun we can also add an interesting Ninth Circuit ruling in US v. Davis, No. 04-50030 (9th Cir. June 9, 2005) (available here). Here is the opening paragraph:
We must decide whether a district court has discretion to permit a defendant to withdraw his guilty plea prior to sentencing when the district court finds that defense counsel “grossly mischaracterized” the defendant’s possible sentence, but also finds that the mischaracterization did not actually prejudice the defendant as is required to invalidate a plea post-sentence. We answer “yes.” Because the district court did not believe it had such discretion, we vacate and remand for reconsideration of defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea.
Needless to say, this Davis ruling could be of great interest to other defendants seeking to withdraw a plea based on counsel's pre- or post-Booker/Blakely sentencing advice.
June 9, 2005 at 03:29 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A plea/sentencing ruling of note from the 9th:
I am a formally trained paralegal, and the mother of an inmate convicted of a 'sexual offense' and who is currently attempting to withdraw from a plea. All of his efforts per 'Blakely' have been literally ignored via no response, eg. 'review denied'. It is very discouraging as to the disparity in the justice system. I appreciate the information on your site and will include it as a link from my blog for others who are attempting to keep up with current rulings.
Posted by: RS | Sep 22, 2005 5:49:24 AM
Posted by: | Oct 14, 2008 11:14:49 AM
Thanks! Very Interesting! Great Job! Great Blog!
Posted by: מוסך מיצובישי | Jan 6, 2011 6:30:26 AM