Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Khoury, 95-1323 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Number: 95-1323 Visitors: 1
Filed: Feb. 14, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: On the cover sheet, last line before the date, change, appellee to appellant.Daniel S. Tarlow, Richard D. Glovsky and Glovsky, Tarlow , __________________ ___________________ ___________________, Milberg on brief for appellant.consequences of his plea is not a basis for relief.
USCA1 Opinion









February 14, 1996
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

___________________




No. 95-1323


UNITED STATES,
Appellee,

v.


JAMIL KHOURY,
Defendant, Appellant.

____________________



ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on February 12, 1996 is
amended as follows:

On the cover sheet, last line before the date, change
"appellee" to "appellant."


































February 12, 1996 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


____________________


No. 95-1323

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

JAMIL KHOURY,

Defendant, Appellant.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Nathaniel M. Gorton, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges. ______________

____________________

Daniel S. Tarlow, Richard D. Glovsky and Glovsky, Tarlow & __________________ ___________________ ___________________
Milberg on brief for appellant. _______


____________________


____________________






2













Per Curiam. After carefully reviewing the record, __________

we conclude the appeal is wholly without merit and allow

counsel's motion to withdraw. The guilty plea colloquy fully

complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, and there is no basis on

the present record for concluding that the plea was not

voluntarily, intelligently, and understandingly entered. The

district court's failure to warn defendant of the immigration

consequences of his plea is not a basis for relief. See, ___

e.g., United States v. Quin, 836 F. 2d 654, 655 (1st Cir. ____ _____________ ____

1987); Nunez Cordero v. United States, 533 F.2d 723, 726 ______________ _____________

(1st Cir. 1976).

Outlining several claims, appellate counsel asks

that we direct the district court to appoint counsel to file

a 2255 petition. We decline to do so. The district court

is in the best position to make the initial determination

whether counsel should be appointed.

The judgment is affirmed and counsel's motion to ________

withdraw is granted.

















3






Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer