USA V. CHRIS SAGE, No. 14-30098 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUN 29 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 14-30098 D.C. No. 1:13-cr-00100-PA v. MEMORANDUM* CHRIS DARRELL JOSEPH SAGE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Owen M. Panner, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 22, 2015** Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. Chris Darrell Joseph Sage appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 240-month sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii). We dismiss. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Sage pled guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement, which contained an appeal waiver. Sage argues the appeal waiver is unenforceable because his guilty plea was involuntary, based on the alleged abusive conduct of his attorney. Sage’s allegations of misconduct by his attorney, as described in two letters and two preplea hearings, do not establish that Sage was coerced into entering a guilty plea. To the contrary, Sage confirmed at his plea hearing that his guilty plea was not “the result of force, threat or intimidation by anyone.” We give considerable weight to Sage’s confirmation on this point as we have previously explained that “[s]olemn declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity.” Doe v. Woodford, 508 F.3d 563, 571 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal quotations omitted). Moreover, the district court appointed another lawyer to give Sage a second opinion. On this record, we conclude the appeal waiver is valid and enforceable. See United States v. Brizan, 709 F.3d 864, 866-67 (9th Cir. 2013). DISMISSED. 2 14-30098

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.