Unpublished Disposition, 935 F.2d 275 (9th Cir. 1991)Annotate this Case
The PEOPLE OF the TERRITORY OF GUAM, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Christopher IBANEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 29, 1991.* Decided June 4, 1991.
Before HUG, KOZINSKI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Christopher Ibanez appeals from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the District Court of Guam affirming the Superior Court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. Ibanez was convicted on a guilty plea of manslaughter in violation of 9 Guam Code Ann. Sec. 16.50(a) (1) and sentenced to seven years' imprisonment. He contends that the trial court was required to sentence him under the Guam Youth Correction Act or else to make an express finding that he would "not derive benefit from treatment." We have jurisdiction under 48 U.S.C. § 1424-3(c) and we affirm.
We review de novo decisions the District Court of Guam renders in its appellate capacity. People v. Yang, 850 F.2d 507 (9th Cir. 1988). A court is not required to enumerate all of the rights a defendant waives when he enters voluntarily and knowingly into a plea agreement. Rodriguez v. Ricketts, 798 F.2d 1250, 1254 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1057 (1987). The Youth Correction Act, 9 Guam Code Ann. Sec. 83, provides options for sentencing criminals between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five. Section 83.35(c) permits a court to sentence a youth offender as an adult " [i]f the court shall find that the youth offender will not derive benefit from treatment."1 Section 83.45 forbids a court from committing a youth offender under the Act until the Director of the Department of Corrections has certified "that proper and adequate treatment facilities and personnel have been provided." The facilities the Act contemplates have never been established on Guam and for that reason, no one has ever been sentenced as a youth offender under the Act.
Ibanez was initially charged with aggravated murder. He pleaded guilty to the lesser included offense of manslaughter in accordance with an agreement with the prosecution. The trial court sentenced Ibanez as the agreement provided without making any finding that he would not derive benefit from treatment. He claims that the sentence is illegal in light of Sec. 83.35(c). We disagree. Even if Ibanez retained the right to be sentenced as a youth offender after he pleaded guilty, see Rodriguez, 798 F.2d 1250, the trial court was not authorized to sentence him under the Act without the certification Sec. 83.45 describes.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
The Honorable Alfred T. Goodwin, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation
The Honorable Alex R. Munson, District Judge, United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, sitting by designation
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
" 'Treatment' means corrective and preventive guidance and training designed to protect the public by corecting the antisocial tendencies of youth offenders." 9 Guam Code Ann. Sec. 83.15(f)