United States of America v. Miguel Nunez-Pompa

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Honorable Ronald S.W. Lew, Senior United States District Judge**
for the Central District of California, 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
MIGUEL NUNEZ-POMPA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-10034
D.C. No. 4:11-cr-02067-DCB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding**
Submitted August 14, 2013***
Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Miguel Nunez-Pompa appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
FILED
AUG 19 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-10034 2
reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We dismiss.
Nunez-Pompa contends that the district court violated Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 32(i)(4)(A)(ii) by not permitting him to present letters from his
family in mitigation of his sentence. The government contends that this appeal
should be dismissed based on a sentencing appeal waiver. We review de novo
whether to enforce an appeal waiver. See United States v. Joyce, 357 F.3d 921,
922 (9th Cir. 2004). This appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, which
covered any sentencing challenge. See id. (“A defendant’s waiver of his appellate
rights is enforceable if the language of the waiver encompasses his right to appeal
on the grounds raised, and if the waiver was knowingly and voluntarily made.”).
Contrary to Nunez-Pompa’s contention, because the waiver here unambiguously
applies to the claim raised on appeal, United States v. Petty, 80 F.3d 1384, 1387
(9th Cir. 1996), does not compel a different result. Accordingly, we dismiss this
appeal based on the valid appeal waiver.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --