United States v. Zaid Wakil , 700 F. App'x 685 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                                                              FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    OCT 27 2017
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                         No.   15-50380
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                 D.C. No.
    2:12-cr-00527-GW-12
    v.
    ZAID ABDUL WAKIL, AKA Alvin                       MEMORANDUM*
    Boatright,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding
    Argued and Submitted October 4, 2017
    Pasadena, California
    Before: KLEINFELD, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    Zaid Wakil appeals his jury conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent
    to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and three counts of possession
    with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A).
    We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a).
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    1. Wakil did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel
    because the district court failed to ensure that he understood the possible penalties
    he faced. See United States v. Erskine, 
    355 F.3d 1161
    , 1167 (9th Cir. 2004)
    (setting forth the conditions that need to be met in order for a Faretta waiver to be
    deemed valid).
    2. Contrary to the government's suggestion, remand is inappropriate. In
    limited circumstances, we may remand if “the record suggests that there is
    additional evidence available about the adequacy of a waiver.” United States v.
    Kimmel, 
    672 F.2d 720
    , 722 (9th Cir. 1982). But remand is the exception, not the
    rule, and it is not appropriate here because nothing in the record suggests that there
    are undiscovered facts showing that Wakil was aware of the possible penalties at
    the time of his waiver. We therefore reverse the district court’s judgment and
    remand for a new trial.
    3. It is unnecessary to reach Wakil’s remaining claims in light of the
    disposition of this case.
    REVERSED and REMANDED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-50380

Citation Numbers: 700 F. App'x 685

Filed Date: 10/27/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023