United States v. Daniel Muratella
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 22077
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- Muratella was indicted for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine (21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)).
- In April 2015 the Government informed defense counsel it might file a 21 U.S.C. § 851 information notifying a prior felony drug conviction that would raise the statutory mandatory minimum from 10 to 20 years.
- Plea negotiations continued without agreement; a jury trial was set for September 28, 2015.
- The Government filed the § 851 information on September 17, 2015. On September 18, Muratella entered an unconditional guilty plea after being told the filing increased his mandatory minimum to 20 years.
- At sentencing Muratella objected to the § 851 filing as vindictive prosecution; the district court found no vindictiveness and overruled the objection. The court sentenced Muratella to the 20-year statutory minimum.
- On appeal Muratella challenged only vindictive prosecution; the Eighth Circuit considered whether his unconditional guilty plea waived that claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether filing a § 851 information was vindictive prosecution | Muratella: Government filed § 851 solely to punish him for asserting rights and to coerce plea | Government: No vindictive motive; also plea waived the claim | Court: No vindictiveness finding needed—claim waived by knowing, unconditional guilty plea |
| Whether an unconditional guilty plea waives a prosecutorial vindictiveness claim | Muratella: Could not meaningfully defend against § 851 filed day before plea; plea therefore did not waive claim | Government: A knowing and intelligent plea waives non-jurisdictional claims, including this one | Court: Plea was knowing and intelligent; claim waived because filing § 851 is non-jurisdictional |
Key Cases Cited
- Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21 (1974) (exception where government increases charges in retaliation for exercise of rights can be jurisdictional vindictiveness)
- United States v. Vaughan, 13 F.3d 1186 (8th Cir. 1994) (a valid guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional defects)
- United States v. Williams, 793 F.3d 957 (8th Cir. 2015) (defines vindictive prosecution standard)
- Weisberg v. Minnesota, 29 F.3d 1271 (8th Cir. 1994) (discusses limits on post-plea constitutional claims)
- United States v. Soriano-Hernandez, 310 F.3d 1099 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review for legal questions about waivers)
- United States v. Green, 521 F.3d 929 (8th Cir. 2008) (review standard for mixed questions of law and fact)