Free Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 05—l0076
D.C. No. CR-04-00924- l -J AT
Plaintiff- Appellee,
V. I
JUDGMENT
FILEMON ROJO-GALEANA,
Defendant- Appellant. i' A - A
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
(Phoenix).
On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this
Court, that the appeal in this cause be, and hereby is DISMISSED.
Filed and entered 07/26/06
A more copy
gf¤r_H~·gf A C;:$p;asoN_1p
_ ; e a
i if P5
, ,,2 ‘ ...¤r ’
Case 2:04-cr—00924-JAT Document 33 Filed 08/17/2006 * . e et? Cl fw A

Nor Pon PUBLICATION JUL 26 2006
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS °“TUYé-i€ FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 05-10076
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. N0. CR-04-00924-I-JAT
V. 0 -
MEMORANoUM*
FILEMON ROJO-GALEANA,
Defendant — Appellant. l
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 24, 2006**
Before: ALARCON, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Filemon Rojo-Galeana appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 60-
month sentence imposed for illegal re-entry into the United States following
deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § l326(a). Roj o-Galeana’s attomey has
" This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be
. cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
` "' This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Case 2:04-cr—00924-JAT Document 33 Filed 08/17/2006 Page 2 of 3

moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. Calybrnia, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), on the
ground that the appeal presents no arguable issues. Rojo-Galeana has not
submitted a pro se supplemental brief
Because our independent review ofthe record pursuant to Pensan v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 82-83 (1988), indicates that Rojo-Galeana knowingly and voluntarily
`waived his right to appeal and was sentenced within the terms ofthe plea
agreement, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. See United States v.
Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000) (stating that an appeal waiver is
valid when it is entered knowingly and voluntarily); see also United States v.
Cardenas, 405 F.3d 1046, 1048 (9th Cir. 2005) (noting that the changes in
sentencing law imposed by United States v. Beoker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), did not
render waiver of appeal involuntary and unknowing).
C0unse1’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is
DISMISSED. 1
A TRUE COPY ·
CATHY A.;CA3TERSOI\f
Clerk <;>rQ¤1,trt U t ·;.
ATTESi§`;`_ _ __5 C / ti 2
2 ti 0000;
-·
Case 2:04-cr—00924-JAT Document 33 Filed 08/17/2006 ' ._g - hz •‘* ‘ -. JGYYQ .-~·

Case 2:04-cr-00924-JAT

Document 33

Filed 08/17/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:04-cr-00924-JAT

Document 33

Filed 08/17/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:04-cr-00924-JAT

Document 33

Filed 08/17/2006

Page 3 of 3