Unpublished Disposition, 936 F.2d 580 (9th Cir. 1991)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 936 F.2d 580 (9th Cir. 1991)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William Alfred HAYES II, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 89-50685.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 4, 1991.* Decided June 24, 1991.

Before GOODWIN, PREGERSON and ALARCON, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

William Hayes II appeals from the sentence he received after having pled guilty to one count of possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute. He argues inter alia that the district court failed to comply with Rule 32(a) (1) (C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. We agree. We vacate the sentence and remand for a new sentencing proceeding.

Rule 32(a) (1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that before imposing sentence the district court shall:

(B) afford counsel for the defendant an opportunity to speak on behalf of the defendant; and

(C) address the defendant personally and determine if the defendant wishes to make a statement and to present any information in mitigation of the sentence.

In United States v. Navarro-Flores, 628 F.2d 1178 (9th Cir. 1980), we held that failure to comply with Rule 32(a) (1) (C) compels reversal and remand for resentencing. Id. at 1184. The district court in this matter failed to comply with Rule 32(a) (1) (C).

The Government asserts that the terms of Hayes' plea agreement included a waiver of the right to appeal from his sentence. A defendant may appeal from a judgment of conviction. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(b). A defendant who pleads guilty may appeal from the sentence imposed by the court. 18 U.S.C. § 3742. We have previously upheld an explicit waiver of the right to appeal from a sentence. United States v. Navarro-Botello, 912 F.2d 318, 319 (9th Cir. 1990).

In this matter, as part of the plea agreement, Hayes waived his "right to appeal." In doing so, Hayes gave up the right to raise on appeal any error that had occurred prior to the entry of his plea of guilty "even if he did not know exactly what the nature of these appeals might be." Navarro-Botello at 320. He did not, however, expressly waive his right to appeal from any unanticipated procedural errors that might subsequently occur during the sentencing proceedings.

The sentence is VACATED and this matter is REMANDED with directions to conduct a new sentencing proceeding.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs and without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a), Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.