Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02126/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02126-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Patricia Ann Snow
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

) 

vs. ) 

) 

PATRICIA ANN SNOW, ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellant. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

AUG O 51992 

JWBEKf L. HOE~ 

Cler~ 

No. 91-2126 

(D.C. No . CR-90-490-HB) 

(D.N.M.) 

Before BALDOCK, SETH and KELLY, Circuit Judges.** 

Defendant-appellant Patricia Ann Snow pled guilty to an 

indictment charging her with possession of marijuana with intent 

to distribute, 21 U.S.C. S 84l(a)(l) & 84l(b)(d), and was 

sentenced to twenty-seven months imprisonment. On appeal, she 

contends that her plea was involuntary because the district court 

failed to advise her that parole had been abolished under the 

Sentencing Guidelines, and that this would affect the amount of 

time she served. Our review of the voluntariness of a plea and of 

compliance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 is de novo. See United States 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

** Pursuant to our June 16 , 1992, order, this case was submitted 

for disposition on the briefs pursuant to Fed. R. App . P. 34(a) 

and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9 . 

Appellate Case: 91-2126 Document: 010110259054 Date Filed: 08/05/1992 Page: 1
v. Williams, 919 F.2d 1451, 1455 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 

111 S. Ct. 1604 (1991); United States v. Gomez-Cuevas, 917 F.2d 

1521, 1524 (10th Cir. 1990). 

Under the Sentencing Guidelines, we have held repeatedly that 

a district court need only comply with Fed. R. Crim. P. ll(c)(l), 

and advise of any mandatory minimum penalty and the maximum 

penalty of the offense. Gomez-Cuevas, 917 F.2d at 1526; Williams, 

919 F.2d at 1456; United States v. Rhodes, 913 F.2d 839, 843, 

(10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 111 S. Ct. 1079 (1991); United 

States v. Rutter, 897 F.2d 1558, 1564 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 

111 S . Ct. 88 (1990). Indeed, when taking a plea, a district 

court is not required to inform a defendant of the actual 

guideline range or sentence, Gomez-Cuevas, 917 F.2d at 1527; 

Rhodes, 913 F.2d at 843; Rutter, 897 F.2d at 1564, let alone the 

lack of availability of parole. See Gomez-Cuevas, 917 F.2d at 

1527 (district court not required to inform defendant that 

probation not available under the Guidelines). While we agree 

with Defendant that a plea must be knowing and voluntary, see 

McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459. 466 (1969), her argument 

that a plea is deprived of such character by a failure to advise 

concerning the lack of parole eligibility would seem to be 

foreclosed by Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U. S. 53 (1985). 

We have never held that the United States Constitution 

requires the State to furnish a defendant with 

information about parole eligibility in order for the 

defendant's plea of guilty to be voluntary, and indeed 

such a requirement would be inconsistent with the 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-2126 Document: 010110259054 Date Filed: 08/05/1992 Page: 2
current rules of procedure governing the entry of guilty 

pleas in federal court. 

Id. at 56. Therefore, the judgment is AFFIRMED. The mandate 

shall issue forthwith. 

Entered for the Court 

Paul J. Kelly, Jr. 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 91-2126 Document: 010110259054 Date Filed: 08/05/1992 Page: 3