United States v. Wild

PER CURIAM: *

Daniel Wild appeals his guilty-plea conviction for importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1).

For the first time on appeal, Wild contends his plea agreement is unenforceable because the district court: failed to accept it; and failed to conform to Fed. R. CrimP. 11(c)(4) (“If the court accepts the plea agreement, it must inform the defendant that to the extent the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(A) ..., the agreed disposition will be included in the judgment.”)

If a defendant fails to object to Rule 11 error in district court,…