United States v. Ronald Joseph Valle, (Two Cases)

85 F.3d 639 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Ronald Joseph VALLE, Defendant-Appellant. (Two Cases) Nos. 94-50143, 94-50148. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 9, 1996. * Decided May 6, 1996. 1 Before: SCHROEDER and LEAVY, Circuit Judges, and TRIMBLE, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Pursuant to a Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(e)(1)(B) plea agreement, Ronald Joseph Valle ("Valle") pleaded guilty to charges of both unarmed and armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113 (a) and (d). Although the district court failed to warn Valle that he would be bound by his guilty plea even if the court later chose to reject the terms of his plea agreement, see Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(e)(2), the court did not reject the agreement and Valle did not object to the court's omission. Valle filed timely notices of appeal from both his conviction and sentence. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386…