USA V. APRIL WILBUR; et al, No. 12-30355 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 15 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 12-30355 D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00191-MJP-3 v. MEMORANDUM* APRIL M. WILBUR, Defendant - Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 12-30356 D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00191-MJP-1 v. C. MARVIN WILBUR, AKA Marvin Wilbur, Sr., Defendant - Appellant. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. No. 12-30357 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00191-MJP-4 Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BRENDA R. WILBUR, Defendant - Appellant. No. 12-30363 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00191-MJP-2 Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOAN C. WILBUR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Marsha J. Pechman, Chief District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted November 6, 2013 Seattle, Washington Before: SCHROEDER and PAEZ, Circuit Judges, and BENITEZ, District Judge.** ** The Honorable Roger T. Benitez, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation. -2- The Wilburs appeal the district court s denial of their joint motion to withdraw their guilty pleas following this court s remand for re-sentencing. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1291, and we affirm. The Wilburs guilty pleas were conditioned upon their right to raise a due process challenge on direct appeal. They contend that a prior panel of this Court failed to consider their challenge. The district court was correct in finding that a prior panel of this Court had fully considered and addressed the due process arguments, as evidenced by the opinion in United States v. Wilbur, 674 F.3d 1160, 1179 (9th Cir. 2012), and the Wilburs petition for rehearing and the denial of that petition. That determination is sufficient to conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Wilburs joint motion to withdraw their guilty pleas after remand. AFFIRMED. -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.
