United States v. Chet Singh Sidhu

5 F.3d 543 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chet Singh SIDHU, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10365. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 31, 1993. * Decided Sept. 14, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, No. CR-90-20128-JW; James Ware, District Judge, Presiding. N.D.Cal. DISMISSED. Before: REAVLEY, ** PREGERSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 ORDER *** 2 Defendant Chet Singh Sidhu pled guilty to one count of bribery of a public official, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 201(b)(1)(c). In the plea agreement, Sidhu freely and voluntarily waived several rights, including the right to appeal adverse determinations of pretrial motions and the right to appeal a verdict of guilty if the matter were to go to trial. 3 We have held a defendant's waiver of his or her right to appeal to be generally enforceable. See United States v. Torres, No.…