N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNIT E D ST AT E S CO URT O F APPE AL S FO R T H E NINT H CIRCUIT
UNIT E D ST A T E S O F AM E RICA, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. DO RIS E . NE L SO N, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 14-30248

D.C . No. 2:11-c r-00159-R HW -1 M E M O RANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of W a shington R obe rt H. W

ha le y , Se nior Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 4, 2016 ** Se attle , W a s hington B e fore : K O Z INSKI , O ’SCANNL AIN and G O UL D , C irc uit Judge s. 1. Ne lson’ s first m otion to withdra w he r guilty

ple a liste d four “points on whic h it is ‘ pla

u sible ’ tha

t give n [ne w] inform ation . . . , she would not ha ve ple a d [sic ] guilty ” to e a c h c ount c ha rge d in theindic t

m e nt. First, she c la i m e d tha t a 

# FIL ED JUN 13 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public ation a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).pa ge 2

se c uritie s la

wy e r, C onra d Ly sia

k, ha d only re c e ntly

be c om e ava ila

ble to a ssist with he r de fe nse . The distric t c ourt re a sona bly re je c te d this c o nte ntion, a s the re c ord showe d tha

t Ne lson “ha d a c c e ss to M r. Ly sia k’ s e xpe rtise ” for “ o ve r two y e ars a fte r the Indic tm e nt.” Se c ond, Ne lson c la im e d tha t, be fore she ple d guilty , she did not ha ve re a d y a c c e ss to a

ha rd drive c onta ining im

porta nt e vide n c e . The distric t c ourt re a sona

bly found tha

t he r sta te m e nts a b out thesignific anc e of the ha rd drive we re not c re dible be c a

use she ha d a c c e ss to thebulk of theinform at ion c onta ine d on the ha rd drive be fore ple a d ing guilty . Se e Unite d Stat e s v. Nostra

tis, 321 F.3d 1206, 1211 (9th C ir. 2003) (thedistric t c ourt ha s broa d disc re tion to ma ke c re d ibility

de te rm inat ions in e va luating a m otion to withdra

w). Third, Ne l son c la i m e d she did not know until a fte r she ple d guilty

tha t she ha d a right to re ta in c ounse l. The distric t c ourt re a sona bly found this c la im disinge nuous be c a

use Ne lson ha d pre viously a c knowle dge d tha

t she ha d suc h a right. Fina lly , pointing to the fa c t tha t the distric t c ourt groupe d c ounts during the ple a c olloquy , Ne lson a lle ge d tha t the c olloquy

c onta ine d a

“ le ss-tha n-c l e ar a c knowle dgm e nt a s to guilt on e ve ry c ount.” B ut Ne lson fa ile d to ide ntify pa rtic u la r c ounts for whic h she m ay not ha ve a c knowle d ge d guilt had the distric t c ourt inquire d a

bout e a c h c o unt sepa

rate ly . Ac c ordingly , the distric t c ourt didn’ tpa ge 3

a buse i ts disc re tion in deny ing Ne lson’ s first m o t ion to withdra w. Se e Unite d Stat e s v. Ya

m a shiro, 788 F.3d 1231, 1236–37 (9th Cir. 2015). 2. Ne lson file d a

re ne we d m otion to withdra w he r guilty

ple a just be fore se nte nc ing. He r re c e nt ly -re ta ine d c ounse l submitte d a n a ffidavit de c l aring tha

t whe n Ne lson ple d guilty , she didn’ t re a liz e she would be “ e xpose d to a se nte nc e ba se d upon a ll a lle ge d losse s
— those within the

indic tm e nt a

nd thoseprova

ble unde r a pre ponde ran c e sta

nda rd.” The distric t c ourt re a s ona bly de t e rm i ne d tha

t this c onte ntion wa sn’ t supporte d by the re c ord. Ne l son ne ve r a l le ge d tha t he r tria l c ounse l m isle d he r a

bout wha t he r ultim ate Guide line s c a lc ulation would be . She a lso a c knowle dge d at he r ple a he aring tha

t she fa c e d a

m axim um se nte nc e of 2200 y e ars. Fina lly , a s the distric t c ourt note d, the re le va nt c onduc t for se nte nc ing purpose s wa s “by

and la rge . . . se t forth in theindic t m e nt,” whic h

Ne lson “ha d a

nd unde rstood, a c c ording to her te stim ony ” whe n ple a ding guilty . Ne lson offe re d no te stim ony c ontra dic ting the se pre vious a c k nowle dgm e nts, a

nd “ [s] tate m e nts m a d e by a de fe nda

nt during a

guilty p le a

he aring c arry

a strong pre sum

ption of ve ra c ity .” Id. at

1237 (quoting Unite d State s v. R oss, 511 F.3d 1233, 1236 (9th C ir. 2008)).pa ge 4

Nor c ould Ne lson withdra w he r ple a be c a

use she e xpe c te d tha

t she would re c e ive a thre e -point Guide line s re duc tion for ple a ding guilty . “ A de fe nda nt c annot withdra

w his ple a

be c a use he re a liz e s tha

t his se nte n c e will behighe r tha n he ha d e xpe c t e d.” Nostra tis, 321 F.3d a

t 1211. Ac c ordingly , the distric t c o urt didn’ t a buse its disc re tion in finding tha t Ne lson’ s se nte nc ing e xpe c tations didn’ t c onstitute a “ fa ir a nd just re a son” for withdra wa l. Se e Yam a shiro, 788 F.3d a t 1237. Fina lly , Ne lson’ s c ounse l c la im e d he r tria l attorne y s ha dn’ t be e n pre pa re d for tria l at the tim e she ple d guilty . B ut the distric t c o urt ha d a lre a dy de te rm ine d, in re je c ting Ne lson’ s atte m

pt to substitute c ounse l be fore ple a d ing guilty , tha t “ he r c ounse l [we re ] a de quate ly pre pa re d for tria l.” Additional ly , Ne l son re pre se nte d during he r ple a

he aring six da

y s la te r that she wa s sa

tisfie d with he r la

wy e rs, a nd both a ttorne y s sta

te d on the re c ord tha

t the y we re re a dy

to go to trial, whic h wa s se t to be gin thefollowing we e k. B e fore us, Ne lson a lso sugge sts tha t the distric t c ourt a pplie d the wrong sta

nda rd in re je c ting this c la im
. B ut the orde r de ny ing Ne lson’ s origina l m otion to withdra w he r guilty

ple a supports the infe re n c e that the distric t c o urt a

pplie d the prope r sta

nda rd whe n re j e c ting he r ne w c la i m . Ac c ordingly , the distric t c ourt didn’ t a buse its disc re t ion in de ny ing Ne lson’ s re ne we d m otion to withdra w he r guilty

ple a .pa ge 5

AFFIRM E D.