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 judgment as to the voluntariness of the guilty pleas and sentencing matters within the scope of the appeal waiver, and dismissed the remainder of the appeal.

Ravon Murrley pleaded guilty to RICO conspiracy and crack cocaine distribution conspiracy and received a 216-month sentence. On appeal, he challenged the validity of his guilty plea and aspects of his sentence. Before the appellate court, Murrley's counsel filed a brief indicating no viable grounds for relief and moved to withdraw, following the procedure established in Anders v. California.

The court conducted an independent review of the record and found no evidence that Murrley's pleas were involuntary. The court also found no sentencing issues that fell within the narrow scope of Murrley's preserved appeal rights, as he had waived most appellate challenges through his plea agreement. Accordingly, the court affirmed the conviction and sentencing determinations that were properly before it and dismissed the remainder of the appeal.

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

Key issues

  • Validity and voluntariness of guilty plea in RICO and drug conspiracy case
  • Enforceability of appellate waiver in plea agreement
  • Appropriateness of 216-month sentence within waived appeal scope

Procedural posture

Murrley appealed his guilty-plea convictions and sentence for RICO conspiracy and cocaine distribution conspiracy, with counsel filing an Anders brief indicating no grounds for relief.

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.