AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant entered a guilty plea, which led to a judgment and sentence that the Defendant later sought to appeal, arguing that the sentence was "unjust and unwarranted" and suggesting that the failure of counsel to file a sentencing memorandum may have contributed to this outcome (paras 1-2).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: The Defendant acknowledged the principle that a guilty plea generally waives the right to appeal but maintained that the sentence was "unjust and unwarranted." The Defendant also suggested that the outcome might have been influenced by counsel's failure to file a sentencing memorandum (paras 1-2).
• Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant's guilty plea, which generally operates as a waiver of the right to appeal, allows for an appeal on the grounds that the sentence was "unjust and unwarranted" and that counsel's failure to file a sentencing memorandum may have contributed to this outcome (paras 1-2).

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed (para 3).

Reasons

• Per M. Monica Zamora, with James J. Wechsler and Cynthia A. Fry concurring, the court found that a guilty plea generally operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the resultant conviction(s) and sentence. The court remained unpersuaded by the Defendant's arguments that the sentence was "unjust and unwarranted" and that the failure of counsel to file a sentencing memorandum may have contributed to this outcome. The court observed that appellate review of a sentence is limited to jurisdictional errors where a defendant does not challenge the validity of a plea agreement and ultimately dismissed the appeal under analogous circumstances (paras 1-3).