United States v. Mayweather
623 F.3d 762
| 9th Cir. | 2010Background
- On January 14, 2008, police responded to a silent alarm at Mayweather's Los Angeles apartment; they entered, observed marijuana, narcotics paraphernalia, a shotgun, leading to a search warrant.
- February 28, 2008, Mayweather was indicted on two drug-distribution counts and one firearm count; Barnwell represented him; pretrial motions were due May 20, 2008.
- May 15–June 2, 2008, government offered to drop narcotics counts in exchange for a guilty plea to the firearms count; plea offer discussed; grossly extended continuance granted.
- June 6, 2008, Mayweather and Barnwell signed a guilty-plea in open court after an extensive Rule 11 colloquy; court stated life maximum and five-year minimum mandatory consecutive sentence.
- August 13, 2008, Mayweather moved to discharge Barnwell and later to withdraw the plea on grounds of coercion and misadvice; district court denied withdrawal and sentenced Mayweather.
- On appeal, the Ninth Circuit addressed whether Mayweather could withdraw his plea pre-sentence under Rule 11(d)(2)(B), and whether ineffective-assistance claims were properly reviewable on direct appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mayweather showed a fair and just reason to withdraw the plea based on failure to pursue suppression. | Mayweather argued Barnwell failed to pursue suppression of the January 14 search. | Mayweather contends the suppression issue, if pursued, could have changed the outcome. | No fair and just reason; knowledge of suppression issue existed; denial affirmed. |
| Whether misadvice about sentencing exposure supports withdrawal of the plea. | Mayweather claimed Barnwell misadvised that the maximum was five years. | Plea colloquy and government recitation showed the minimum five years and maximum life; misadvice not credible. | Misstatement was contradicted by the plea proceeding; withdrawal not warranted. |
| Whether Mayweather's ineffective-assistance claim could be resolved on direct appeal. | Counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to pursue suppression and misadvice issues. | Ineffective-assistance claims require a fuller record; direct review inappropriate. | Not resolved on direct appeal; record insufficient; preserved for collateral review. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. McTiernan, 546 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2008) (remand for fair-and-just withdrawal inquiry when suppression issue known pre-plea; pre-plea knowledge critical)
- United States v. Hyde, 520 U.S. 670 (1997) (generous, liberal standard for withdrawal before sentencing)
- United States v. Davis, 428 F.3d 802 (9th Cir. 2005) (plea withdrawal possible even if guilty, prior to sentencing)
- United States v. Garcia, 401 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2005) (voluntariness of plea does not foreclose withdrawal before sentencing)
- United States v. Ortega-Ascanio, 376 F.3d 879 (9th Cir. 2004) (recognizes fair-and-just reasons may exist for withdrawal)
- United States v. Benford, 574 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 2009) (constructs standard for appellate review of ineffective-assistance claims)
- United States v. Jeronimo, 398 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2005) (assists understanding of when ineffective-assistance claims may be raised on appeal)
- United States v. McTiernan, No. 06-CR-259 (C.D. Cal. 2009) (9th Cir. 2008) (remand outcome on suppression-based withdrawal after evidentiary fact-finding)