Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
14-50401•United States of America v. David Solorzano-Monroy, a.k.a. Daniel Becerra, a.k.a. Daniel Ramirez, a.k.a. David…
14-50401Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit25.01.2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAVID SOLORZANO-MONROY, a.k.a.
Daniel Becerra, a.k.a. Daniel Ramirez,
a.k.a. David Monroy Solorzano,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 14-50401
D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00313-JFW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
David Solorzano-Monroy appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 27-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation
FILED
JAN 25 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).
-- 1 of 2 --
of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
Solorzano-Monroy’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for
relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided
Solorzano-Monroy the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se
supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Solorzano-Monroy waived his right to appeal his sentence, with the
exception of the court’s calculation of his criminal history category. Our
independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to the criminal history category
calculated by the court. We therefore affirm as to that issue. We dismiss the
remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v.
Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
14-50401 2
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.