United States of America v. ERVIN GALBERT, AKA Erv Cat, AKA DC, AKA EC

19-50054Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit23 de ago. de 2019

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ERVIN GALBERT, AKA Erv Cat, AKA
DC, AKA EC,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 19-50054
D.C. No. 2:18-cr-00019-PSG-2
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 19, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Ervin Galbert appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his
guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine
base in the form of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Galbert’s counsel has filed a brief
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
AUG 23 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 19-50054
stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as
counsel of record. We have provided Galbert the opportunity to file a pro se
supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
filed.
Galbert waived his right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of an
appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary. He also waived the right to
appeal five specified issues related to his sentence. 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 voluntariness of Galbert’s plea or any sentencing
issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. We therefore affirm as to those
issues. 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.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.