United States v. David J. Kay
Opinion
537 F.2d 1077
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David J. KAY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 75--3844.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
June 23, 1976.
Richard G. Sherman (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
John Vandevelde, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
OPINION
Before BARNES, HUFSTEDLER and CHOY, Circuit Judges.
PER SURIAM:
1
We do not think that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to permit Kay to withdraw his guilty plea. Kay did not attempt to withdraw his plea until after his codefendants had been sentenced. At that time he realized that adherence to his plea bargain would result in his imprisonment. Under these circumstances, his situation is akin to that of a defendant who seeks to withdraw his plea after sentencing. The district judge could reasonably have concluded that withdrawal of the plea would have permitted 'appellant to use the guilty plea as a means of testing the weight of the potential sentence--a primary policy ground for denying plea changes.' United States v. Simmons, 497 F.2d 177, 179 (5th Cir. 1974).
2
We find no merit to Kay's contention that he was inadequately represented by his counsel.
3
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 12 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
- United States v. Juan Gabriel Ruiz
- United States v. Juan Gabriel Ruiz
- 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4323, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 5968 United States of America v. Jit Singh Nagra, United States of America v. Mohan Singh Nagra
- United States v. Jeffrey Kroening
- United States v. Paulson
- United States v. Hector Martin Ramos
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.