LAW.coLAW.co

UNITED STATES v. MURRLEY (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-02-19No. No. 20-50071

Summary

Holding. The court affirmed the convictions and sentence as to all issues within the scope of Murrley's appeal waiver and those raising no involuntariness concerns, and dismissed the remainder of the appeal. Counsel's motion to withdraw was granted.

Ravon Murrley appealed his guilty-plea convictions and 216-month sentence for RICO conspiracy and drug conspiracy charges. His appellate counsel filed a brief indicating no viable grounds for appeal and requested permission to withdraw. Murrley had signed an appeal waiver that limited his rights to challenge his convictions and sentence, with a narrow exception for claims that his guilty pleas were involuntary.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

  • Enforceability of appeal waiver in guilty-plea cases
  • Voluntariness of guilty pleas
  • Scope of appellate review in cases with waiver agreements

Procedural posture

Murrley appealed his guilty-plea convictions and sentence, having previously signed an appeal waiver with limited exceptions.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Ravon Murrley appeals from the district courts judgment and challenges his guilty-plea convictions and aggregate 216-month sentence for racketeer influenced and corrupt organizations conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Murrleys counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Murrley the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Murrley waived his right to appeal his convictions, with the exception of an appeal based on a claim that his pleas were involuntary. Murrley also waived the right to appeal most aspects of his sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to the voluntariness of Murrleys pleas or any aspect of the sentence that falls outside the scope of the appeal waiver. We, therefore, affirm as to those issues. Having found no arguable issues as to the enforceability of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the remainder of the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).

Counsels motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.