United States of America v. Ki Chong Yoo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KI CHONG YOO,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-10168
D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00203-JAD-
GWF-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 13, 2015**
San Francisco, California
Before: WALLACE, M. SMITH, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Ki Chong Yoo, a native of South Korea, pled guilty to numerous charges
stemming from a conspiracy to commit Travel in Interstate Commerce in Aid of
Racketeering by traveling from California to Nevada to rob a family. In exchange
FILED
MAR 24 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 3 --

for pleading guilty, Yoo received a ten-year prison sentence, and waived his right
to appeal the sentence imposed. Yoo subsequently filed a motion to dismiss his
counsel, which the court granted, and to withdraw his plea agreement, which the
court denied. The court sentenced Yoo to ten years in prison. Yoo appeals, arguing
that inaccurate translations and cultural differences rendered his guilty plea invalid,
and deprived him of his constitutional right to counsel. We affirm.
The “circumstances surrounding the signing and entry of [Yoo’s] plea
agreement” indicate that Yoo knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal
the denial of his motion withdrawing his guilty plea. United States v. Anglin, 215
F.3d 1064, 1066 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259
(9th Cir. 2011). Yoo’s statements made “during a guilty plea hearing carry a strong
presumption of veracity in subsequent proceedings attacking the plea.” United
States v. Ross, 511 F.3d 1233, 1236 (9th Cir. 2008).
In signing his plea agreement, Yoo acknowledged that no one had made any
threats or promises to him, or had forced him to plead guilty. When asked if he was
pleading guilty “because of any coercion or fear of any co-defendants,” Yoo
replied, “No, there’s nothing like that.” The court repeatedly advised Yoo that it
was entirely his choice whether to accept the plea agreement or go to trial, and
gave Yoo numerous chances to either “go forward with the plea agreement,” or “go
2

-- 2 of 3 --

to trial.” Yoo stated, “I will follow the agreement.” The court asked Yoo several
times whether he understood his options and the terms of the plea agreement. Yoo
asked for clarification when he did not understand, and agreed with the court’s
statement that he was “willing to accept the binding Plea Agreement and . . .
sentence of 120 months.”
The record does not support Yoo’s contention that his plea agreement was
accepted unknowingly or involuntarily.
AFFIRMED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --