FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT May 20, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 12423 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 6 - 0 0 0 4 9 - C R - KD U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s K A R M E L L D E M E T R I U S J O H N S O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e So u th e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( M ay 20, 2008) B efo re A N D E R S O N , H U L L an d F A Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

K a r m e ll D e m e tr iu s J o h n s o n ap p e a ls h is c o n v ic tio n s f o r( 1 ) c o n s p ir a c y to di stri bu t e a nd t o p osse ss w i th the i nt entt o d i stri bu t e m ore than 5 0 g ra m s of c ra ck c oc a i ne , 21 U . S . C . §§ 846, 841( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( A ) ( c ount1) , a nd ( 2) us i ng, c a rry i ng, orpos s e s s i ng a f i r e a r m i n f

ur the r a nc e of

a drug tr a f

f i c ki ng c r i m e , 18 U .S .C . § 9 2 4 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( c o u n t 1 1 ) . J o h n s o n a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t f a ile d to s pe c i f i c a l l y i nf or m hi m tha tthe m a nda t ory m i ni m um t e rm of i m pr i s onm e nt , a nd the on l y s ent ence thatw ou l d b e i m po se d, for c ou nt1o f the i nd i ctm entw as l i fe im p r is o n m e n t w ith o u t r e le a s e . A c c o r d in g ly , h e c o n te n d s th a t th e c o u r t f a ile d to e ns ur e tha the unde r s t ood the c ons e que nc e s of hi s gui l ty pl e a a s r e qui r e d by F e d .R .C r im .P . 1 1 . J o h n s o n c o n c e d e s , h o w e v e r , th a t th is C o u r t s h o u ld r e v ie w h is cl ai m for pl ai n err or because he fa i l ed t o rai se the R ul e 11 i ss ue i n the di stri ct c our t . F orthe r e a s ons s e tf or th m or e f

ul l y be l ow , w e a f

f i rm J ohns on’ s c onvi c t i on. W he n a de f

e nda ntf a i l s t o a s s e r ta R ul e 11 vi ol a t i on i n the di s tr i c tc our t , he m us ts how pl a i n e rr oron di r e c tappe a l t o be e nt i t l e d t o r e l i e f . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. V o n n , 5 3 5 U .S . 5 5 , 5 8 - 5 9 , 1 2 2 S .C t. 1 0 4 3 , 1 0 4 6 , 1 5 2 L .E d .2 d 9 0 ( 2 0 0 2 ) . “P la in e rr oroc c ur s w he r e ( 1) the r e i s a n e rr or ; ( 2) tha ti s pl a i n orobvi ous ; ( 3) a f f e c t i ng the de f e nda nt ’ s s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s i n tha ti tw a s pr e j udi c i a l a nd notha rm l e s s ; a nd (4) thatse ri ou sl y a ff

ec t s the fa i rnes s, i nt egri ty, or pu bl i c r eput at i on of the j ud i ci al p r o c e e d i n g s . ” Un i t e d S t a t e s v . Ha l l , 3 1 4 F . 3 d 5 6 5 , 5 6 6 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2 0 0 2 ) . “ [ A]3

de f e nda ntw ho s e e ks r e ve r s a l of hi s c onvi c t i on a f

t e ra gui l ty pl e a , on the gr ound th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t c o m m itte d p la in e rr o ru n d e rR u le 1 1 , m u s t s h o w a r e a s o n ab le prob abi l i ty that , bu tfor the error, he w ou l d n othave ent er ed the pl ea . ” U ni t ed S t a t e s v. D om i ngue z B e ni t e z , 542 U . S . 74, 83, 124 S . C t . 2333, 2340, 159 L . E d. 2d 157 ( 2004) . W e m a y r e vi e w the e nt i r e r e c or d w he n c ons i de r i ng the e f f e c tof a ny error on the defendant ’ s s ub st ant i al ri gh t s. V on n, 53 5 U . S . at59 , 12 2 S . C t . at 10 46 ; se e a l so U ni t ed S t at es v. Jones, 14 3 F . 3d 14 17 , 14 20 (11th C i r. 19 98 ). B e f or e the di s tr i c tc our ta c c e pt s a gui l ty pl e a , the c our tm us ta ddr e s s the de f e nda nti n ope n c our ta nd e ns ur e tha tthe de f e nda ntunde r s t a nds , i nt e ra l i a , “ a ny m axi m um po ss i bl e penal ty, i ncl ud i ng i m pri sonm ent , fi ne, and t erm of supervi se d r e le a s e ” a n d “a n y m a n d a to ry m in im u m p e n a lty .” F e d .R .C r im .P . 1 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( H ) , ( I ) . M oreover, w e have hel d thatthe di stri ctcourt“ m ustensure thatthe three core c onc e rns of

R ul e 11 . . . ha ve be e n m e t : ( 1) the gui l ty pl e a m us tbe f r e e f r om c oe r c i on; ( 2) the de f

e nda ntm us tunde r s t a nd the na tur e of the c ha r ge s ; a nd ( 3) the defe nd antm ustkn ow and u nd er st and the consequences of hi s gui l ty pl ea . ” U ni t ed S ta te s v . L e

ja r d e - R a d a , 3 1 9 F .3 d 1 2 8 8 , 1 2 8 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . W e pr ovi de a s tr ong pr e s um pt i on of truth f ors t a t e m e nt s m a de by the de f e nda nt du ri ng the pl eacol l oq uy. U ni t ed S t at es v. M edl ock, 12 F . 3d 18 5, 18 7 (11 th C i r. 19 94 ).4

H er e, the re cord i nd i ca t es thatJohn son w as advi se d, bo th i n the w ri tt en pl ea a g r e e m e n t a n d a t th e c h a n g e - o f - p le a h e a r in g , o f

th e s ta tu to ry p e n a ltie s th a t c o u ld be i m po se d fol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty pl eat o cou nt1 o f the i nd i ctm ent . T he w ri tt en pl ea a gr e e m e nte xpl i c i t l y s t a t e d tha tthe s t a tut ory pe na l t i e s i nc l ude d am i ni m um s e n te n c e o f

1 0 y e a r s ’ im p r is o n m e n t a n d a m a x im u m s e n te n c e o f lif e im p r is o n m e n t. T he a gr e e m e ntw e nton t o s t a t e , how e ve r , tha tba s e d on the gove rnm e nt ’ s not i c e of enhancem ent , John son w ou l d b e s ubj ec tt o a m andat ory m i ni m um se nt ence of l i fe i m pr i s onm e nta s t o c ount1. J ohns on s i gne d the pl e a a gr e e m e nt , a f f i rm i ng tha the h a d r e v ie w e d it w ith tr ia l c o u n s e l a n d th a t h e u n d e r s to o d its te rm s . A tthe c ha nge - of

- pl e a he a r i ng, the di s tr i c tc our tdi r e c t l y que s t i one d J ohns on ab o u t th e p le a a g r e e m e n t, a n d J o h n s o n c o n f irm e d th a t h e h a d r e v ie w e d it w ith c ouns e l a nd tha the unde r s t ood i t s t e rm s . T he c our te xpl i c i t l y a dvi s e d J ohns on of th e s ta tu to ry p e n a ltie s ap p lic ab le to c o u n t 1 o f th e in d ic tm e n t a n d w e n t o n to expl ai n thatthe go vernm enthad fi l ed a not i ce of enhancem entw hi ch, i f the court f o u n d th a t J o h n s o n w a s e lig ib le b a s e d o n h is p r io rc o n v ic tio n s , w o u ld s u b je c t h im t o a m a nda t ory m i ni m um s e nt e nc e of l i f e i m pr i s onm e nt . T he c our ta s ke d J ohns on i f he unde r s t ood the c ons e que nc e s of hi s gui l ty pl e a a s t o c ount1, a nd J ohns on re spon ded thathe di d. T he di stri ctcourtfurther e xp l ai ned thatparol e had been ab o lis h e d in th e f

e d e r a l s y s te m a n d v e r if

ie d th a t J o h n s o n u n d e r s to o d th a t h e w o u ld5

notbe r e l e a s e d on pa r ol e dur i ng hi s t e rm of i m pr i s onm e nt . T he r e w a s no a m bi gui ty i n J ohns on’ s s t a t e m e nt s t o the c our torothe ri ndi c a t i on tha the di d not u n d e r s ta n d th e p r o c e e d in g . A l though the di s tr i c tc our tdi s c us s e d the appl i c a t i on of the S e nt e nc i ng G u id elin es an d th e im p o siti o n o f a term o f s u p er v ised re leas e f o ll o w in g Jo h n so n ’s i m pri sonm ent , the courtdi d n oterr i n adv i si ng John son o f these po ss i bi l i t i es , as r e qui r e d unde rR ul e 11, be c a us e i tha d noty e tde t e rm i ne d w he the rJ ohns on’ s pr i or c onvi c t i ons qua l i f

i e d hi m f ora § 851 e nha nc e m e nt , orw he the rthe r e w e r e a ny g r o u n d s f

o ra d o w n w a r d d e p a r tu r e . S e e F e d .R .C r im .P . 1 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( H ) , ( M ) . M or e ove r , J ohns on ne ve re xpr e s s e d a ny c onf us i on a s t o the s e nt e nc e he f a c e d a nd ne ve ra tt e m pt e d t o w i thdr a w hi s pl e a . F ur the r , t o the e xt e ntJ ohns on a r gue s tha the w as m i sl ed by the pres ent ence i nv es t i gat i on re po rt(“ P S I” ), the re cord i nd i ca t es thatthe P S I c orre ct l y s t at ed thatJohn son w as subj ec tt o a m andat ory t erm of l i fe im p r is o n m e n t a s to c o u n t 1 . J o h n s o n s ta te d th a t h e h a d r e v ie w e d th e P S I a n d d id no tobj ec tt o i tatse nt enci ng . A cc ordi ng l y, the di stri ctcourtsa t i sf i ed the core c o n c e rn s o f

R u le 1 1 a n d th e r e w a s n o p la in e rr o r . In l i g h to f th e fo reg o i n g , Jo h n so n ’ s co n v i ct i o n i s AF F I RME D.