United States v. Douglas Fitzgerald

474 F. App'x 640
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 19, 2012
Docket11-30200
StatusUnpublished

This text of 474 F. App'x 640 (United States v. Douglas Fitzgerald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Douglas Fitzgerald, 474 F. App'x 640 (9th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Douglas John Fitzgerald appeals pro se from his guilty-plea conviction to one count *641 of attempting to evade and defeat tax, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Fitzgerald contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to withdraw his plea. He argues that he had two fair and just reasons for withdrawal. First, he contends that he was unaware that his plea agreement did not preserve his right to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment on Speedy Trial Act grounds. Second, he argues that he was unaware that he had a viable defense based on an absence of willfulness. The record belies these contentions. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to withdraw. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(d)(2)(B); United States v. Mayweather, 634 F.3d 498, 504 (9th Cir.2010).

To the extent that Fitzgerald contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to consider that contention on direct review. See United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir.2011).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Rahman
642 F.3d 1257 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Mayweather
634 F.3d 498 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
474 F. App'x 640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-douglas-fitzgerald-ca9-2012.