United States of America v. JOSE LUIS PLAZA, Jr.

23-10009Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit10 de jul. de 2023

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JOSE LUIS PLAZA, Jr.,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 23-10009
D.C. No. 4:21-cr-03296-SHR-EJM-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Scott H. Rash, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2023**
Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Jose Luis Plaza, Jr. appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
his guilty-plea conviction and 60-month sentence for smuggling goods from the
United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 554(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Plaza’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no
* 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
JUL 10 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 23-10009
grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have
provided Plaza the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se
supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal as to
Plaza’s conviction, 60-month custodial sentence, and 3-year term of supervised
release. Concerning the conditions of Plaza’s supervised release, we find no
arguable issues except as to special conditions 1 and 4, which involve an
unconstitutional delegation of authority under United States v. Nishida, 53 F.4th
1144, 1151-55 (9th Cir. 2022). We accordingly vacate those conditions and
remand for the district court to modify them in a manner consistent with Nishida.
As to all other issues, we affirm.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; and REMANDED with
instructions.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

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