United States v. Luis Sandoval

Good Law
659 F. App'x 433
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 31, 201615-30131California490 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Luis Hernandez Sandoval appeals his sentence of 120 months for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 846. The sentence was imposed pursuant to a plea agreement that included a waiver of appeal, which stated: “Defendant acknowledges that by entering the guilty plea(s) ,,. [he] waives to the full extent of the law” any right to direct appeal of his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and any right to collateral attack, “except as it relates to the effectiveness of legal representation.” We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a), and review de novo the validity of an appeal waiver. See United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1093-94 (9th Cir. 2010).

Hernandez Sandoval contends that the district court impermissibly referenced his race, ethnicity, or national origin during the sentencing hearing, thereby rendering the sentence unconstitutional and the appeal waiver unenforceable. See United States v. Baramdyka, 95 F.3d 840, 843 (9th Cir. 1996) (“[T]he waiver of a right to appeal may be subject to certain exceptions such as ... racial disparity in sentencing among…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.