Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02020/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02020-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Desseray Monique Wright
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, United States District Judge for the Southern

District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2020

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Southern District of Iowa.

*

Desseray Monique Wright, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: August 7, 2007

Filed: August 10, 2007

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Desseray Wright pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute more than 5 grams

of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(B), and to possessing

firearms in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 924(c)(1)(A)(i). The district court1

 sentenced Wright to consecutive 60-month

prison terms on each count (the statutory minimum sentences), to be followed by

concurrent 4-year terms of supervised release. Wright appeals, and her counsel has

filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the

Appellate Case: 06-2020 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/10/2007 Entry ID: 3340136
-2-

voluntariness of the plea, the government’s refusal to move for a downward departure,

and counsel’s performance during plea and sentencing proceedings. For the reasons

that follow, we affirm.

Wright cannot prevail on a claim that her plea was involuntary in light of her

belief that her sentence would be shorter, because she did not move in the district

court to withdraw her guilty plea. See United States v. Murphy, 899 F.2d 714, 716

(8th Cir. 1990) (claim that guilty plea was involuntary must be presented to district

court and is not cognizable on direct appeal). In addition, the government’s decision

not to file a motion for a downward departure may be challenged only if the defendant

makes a substantial threshold showing of prosecutorial discrimination, irrational

conduct, or bad faith, see United States v. Hardy, 325 F.3d 994, 996 (8th Cir. 2003),

and Wright made no such showing. Finally, Wright needs to pursue any ineffectiveassistance claims in a proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v.

Hughes, 330 F.3d 1068, 1069 (8th Cir. 2003).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we have found no other non-frivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-2020 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/10/2007 Entry ID: 3340136