Opinion ID: 677450
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Counsel's inaccuracies regarding sentencing range

Text: 19 Michlin next argues that his guilty plea cannot stand because his attorney failed to accurately inform him of the sentencing range he was facing. Br. of Michlin at 11. 20 We have held that an erroneous prediction by a defense attorney concerning sentencing does not entitle a defendant to challenge his guilty plea, United States v. Garcia, 909 F.2d 1346, 1348 (9th Cir.1990); United States v. Turner, 881 F.2d 684, 687 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 871, 110 S.Ct. 199, 107 L.Ed.2d 153 (1989), although an exception might be made in a case of gross mischaracterization of the likely outcome, Turner, 881 F.2d at 687 (citing Iaea v. Sunn, 800 F.2d 861, 865 (9th Cir.1986)). Michlin provides no basis on which to determine whether or not his attorney grossly mischaracterized the consequences of pleading guilty, because Michlin does not specify what information his attorney gave him. Michlin has not sustained his burden to show that he did not have adequate or accurate information to enable him to plead knowingly. 21