Lizarraga

United States v. Lizarraga

Good Law
10 F. App'x 576
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 30, 2001No. 00-10320; D.C. No. CR 99-00757-RCCCalifornia291 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Valentina Lizarraga appeals from her guilty plea conviction and 120-month sentence imposed for importation of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a) and 960(b)(1)(B)(ii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lizarraga’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no arguable issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Counsel has identified and correctly rejected as a potential issue for appeal whether Lizarraga’s waiver of her statutory right to appeal *577 was voluntary and knowing. The record confirms that this claim lacks merit.

Lizarraga filed a supplemental pro se brief raising one additional issue. She asserts that counsel was ineffective for failing to advise her of a “mere presence” defense. The record is not sufficiently developed on this claim; therefore, we decline to address it on direct appeal. See United States v. Houtchens, 926 F.2d 824, 828 (9th Cir.1991) (declining to reach merits of defendant’s ineffective assistance claim because “such a claim cannot be advanced without the development of facts outside the original record”) (citations omitted). This disposition…

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.