United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Patricio Franco-lopez, Defendant-appellant, 53 F.3d 340 (9th Cir. 1995)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 53 F.3d 340 (9th Cir. 1995) Submitted April 19, 1995. *Decided April 28, 1995

Before: BROWNING, SNEED, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.


Patricio Franco-Lopez appeals his guilty plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, and for failure to appear in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3146(a) (1). Franco-Lopez contends that the district court violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 by not adequately advising him of the collateral consequence of deportation should he enter a guilty plea. Rule 11 requires only that the district court advise the defendant of "the direct consequences of a plea of guilty," but not the collateral consequences, such as possible deportation. Fruchtman v. Kenton, 531 F.2d 946, 948-949 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 895 (1976). Franco-Lopez concedes that this court has held that deportation is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea, id., but urges us to reconsider that holding. As a general rule, one three judge panel of this court cannot overrule the decision of a prior panel. United States v. Gay, 967 F.2d 322, 327 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 359 (1992). Accordingly, the district court did not err in denying Franco-Lopez's pre-sentencing motion to set aside his guilty plea.



The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 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