Espinoza-Carmona

United States v. Espinoza-Carmona

Good Law
35 F. App'x 625
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 24, 2002No. 01-10397; D.C. No. CR-01-00263-EHCCalifornia227 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Adrian Ramon Espinoza-Carmona appeals his single count conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, and sentence for reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326 (a) and (b)(2).

Espinoza-Carmona’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), and has moved to withdraw as counsel of record. Espinoza-Carmona did not file a pro se supplemental brief.

Because our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), indicates that the plea agreement, including the waiver of the right to *626 appeal, was entered knowingly and voluntarily, United States v. Aguilar-Muniz, 156 F.3d 974, 976 (9th Cir.1998) (waiver of right to appeal is valid if knowing and voluntary), we enforce the waiver, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and dismiss the appeal.

We REMAND to the district court with directions to correct the judgment of conviction to exclude the reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2), consistent with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th…

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.