Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. Mendenhall
Citation: 310 F. App'x 195Docket: No. 07-30203
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; January 26, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
William Clifford Mendenhall appeals his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute over 500 grams of methamphetamine, violating 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and § 846. The appellate court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and has vacated the judgment, remanding the case for resentencing. Mendenhall contends, and the government agrees, that the district court incorrectly rejected the plea agreement. The court misinterpreted the plea agreement's addendum as a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea, which would require a specific sentence below the statutory minimum. The addendum actually did not fall under Rule 11(c)(1)(C), as it merely allowed the government to request a sentence reduction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 5K1.1 and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), without binding the court to a specific sentence. The underlying plea agreement was governed by Rule 11(c)(1)(A) and (B), with no reference to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) or any specific sentencing range. The court's confusion extended to a misinterpretation of defense counsel’s statements regarding appeal rights, mistakenly believing Mendenhall could appeal a sentence above the statutory maximum rather than below the statutory minimum. This misunderstanding led to an erroneous rejection of the plea agreement. The appellate court declined to assign the case to a different district judge, affirming that Mendenhall will have another chance to enter into the rejected plea agreement. The government may seek a lenient sentence if it deems Mendenhall has earned such relief. The district court will have full discretion to determine an appropriate sentence under the relevant statutes and case law. The judgment is vacated and remanded, with this disposition not intended for publication or to serve as precedent.