United States of America v. Bill Celeya Flores

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BILL CELEYA FLORES,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-30273
D.C. No. 3:09-cr-05810-RBL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Bill Celeya Flores appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed following
his guilty-plea conviction for eight counts of distribution of Oxycodone, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C); one count of possession with
intent to distribute Oxycodone, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C)
FILED
JUL 02 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-30273 2
and 18 U.S.C. § 2; and one count of possession of a firearm by an unlawful user of
a controlled substance (Methadone), in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(3),
924(a)(2) and 2. We dismiss.
Flores contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at
sentencing when counsel failed to object to arguments made by the government
that allegedly breached the plea agreement. We are precluded from reaching the
merits of Flores’s claim by a valid appeal waiver in which Flores gave up his right
to pursue a direct appeal of his sentence. See United States v. Nunez, 223 F.3d
956, 959 (9th Cir. 2000) (“[O]ne waives the right to argue ineffective assistance of
counsel at sentencing on direct appeal when one waives the right to appeal the
sentence.”).
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --