The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
11-10138•United States of America v. Fernando Delgado-Ornelas
11-10138Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFeb 14, 2013
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the**
District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
FERNANDO DELGADO-ORNELAS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10138
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-00707-DCB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David S. Doty, District Judge, Presiding**
Submitted February 11, 2013***
Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Fernando Delgado-Ornelas appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for reentry after
FILED
FEB 14 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS
-- 1 of 2 --
11-10138 2
deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), Delgado-Ornelas’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are
no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record.
Delgado-Ornelas has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No answering brief has
been filed.
Delgado-Ornelas has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United
States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly grant the
government’s motion to dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
Delgado-Ornelas’s motion for leave to file a request for an extension of time
and request for extension of time are denied as moot, as Delgado-Ornelas’s pro se
brief was received and filed within the time granted by the court.
DISMISSED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.