United States v. De La Merced

Good Law
19 F. App'x 537
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 19, 2001No. 99-50421; D.C. No. CR-97-00831-SVWCalifornia283 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Mendoza De La Merced appeals his 108-month sentence following his conviction by guilty plea to violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 , 1546(a), 2(a) and (b), 1341, and 1956(a) and (h). De La Merced’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), stating that she finds no viable issues to raise on De La Merced’s behalf. De La Merced has filed a pro se supplemental brief contending that the district court erred by: 1) sentencing him for money laundering based on an amount in excess of $1,000,000; 2) failing to make findings as to the amount of money involved in the conspiracy; 3) failing to limit his responsibility in the money laundering scheme to those amounts of money that were reasonably foreseeable; and, 4) denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. We find these contentions unpersuasive.

The record here, however, shows that De La Merced knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal as part of his valid written plea agreement, see United States v. Buchanan, 59 F.3d 914, 916-17 (9th Cir.1995). We therefore lack jurisdiction to consider his appeal. United States v. Martinez, 143 F.3d…

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.