United States of America v. Benga Akanni Oyeniran

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BENGA AKANNI OYENIRAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 13-50357
D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00844-JAK-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2014**
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Benga Akanni Oyeniran appeals his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to
commit bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
DEC 2 2014
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 2 --

Oyeniran contends that his guilty plea is invalid because it was not knowing
and voluntary. We review de novo whether a plea was voluntary, and we treat the
question of whether a plea was knowing as a factual matter to be reviewed for clear
error. United States v. Sharp, 941 F.2d 811, 815-16 (9th Cir. 1991), superseded by
statute on other grounds, 18 U.S.C. § 3663. In both the signed plea agreement and
at the plea colloquy, Oyeniran certified that he understood his plea, had carefully
and thoroughly discussed it with his counsel, and had voluntarily agreed to its
terms. Those certifications “carry a strong presumption of truth,” Muth v.
Fondren, 676 F.3d 815, 821 (9th Cir. 2012), and Oyeniran’s claim that this
presumption is overcome here because he did not understand the nature of the
conspiracy charge is belied by the record.
AFFIRMED.
13-50357 2

-- 2 of 2 --