US v. Yelizarov: Y was charged with multiple offenses arising from a robbery and was presented with a plea bargain in which the Government promised not to seek a sentence higher than 40 years in prison and prevented local authorities from charging Y with anything related to the conduct set forth in the statement of facts. Y accepted. Afterwards, his counsel was told by the Government that Y was a suspect in an unrelated murder. Y told counsel not to try and resolve that charge along with the others, but he was reconsidering his plea. Ultimately, another plea bargain was negotiated that included a binding 30-year sentence and maintained the limitation on state prosecution. Y pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. He was then charged separately with the murder, for which he received a consecutive sentence of 20 years. The district court rejected Y’s argument that he received ineffective assistance of counsel related to the plea negotiations.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the denial of Y’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Skipping to whether he had been prejudiced by any defective performance, the court concluded that Y had not shown that he would have decided not to plead guilty had he known that the subsequent murder charges had been brought. The court also affirmed Y’s 30-year sentence, holding that any appeal of it was barred by a valid appeal waiver, even after one of the charges had been vacated due to shifts in “crime of violence” law, given that it was a binding plea that specifically provided for such a contingency.
No comments:
Post a Comment