You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

United States v. Torres

Citation: 168 F. App'x 182Docket: No. 04-10661

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; February 16, 2006; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by a defendant convicted and sentenced to 120 months for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of federal statutes 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(viii) and § 846. The appellate court held jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Following the submission of a brief by defense counsel under Anders v. California, which indicated no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw, the defendant did not file a supplemental brief. The court conducted an independent review of the record, as required by Penson v. Ohio, confirming that the defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was made knowingly and voluntarily. Consequently, the court enforced this waiver, referencing United States v. Nguyen and United States v. Cardenas, which uphold such waivers despite changes in sentencing laws. The court granted the motion for counsel to withdraw and dismissed the appeal, determining that the decision is unpublished and non-citable except as allowed by circuit rules.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appeal Waiver in Plea Agreements

Application: The court determined that the defendant's waiver of his right to appeal his sentence was entered knowingly and voluntarily, thereby enforcing the waiver and dismissing the appeal.

Reasoning: Torres knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence. Consequently, the court enforces the waiver and dismisses the appeal.

Counsel's Obligation under Anders v. California

Application: The defense counsel submitted a brief indicating no grounds for relief and sought to withdraw from representation, complying with the standards set forth in Anders v. California.

Reasoning: Following the precedent set in Anders v. California, Torres's counsel submitted a brief indicating no grounds for relief and a motion to withdraw as counsel.

Independent Review under Penson v. Ohio

Application: An independent review of the record was conducted, confirming the defendant's waiver of appeal was valid, as required by Penson v. Ohio.

Reasoning: An independent review of the record, pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, confirms that Torres knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence.

Non-Publication and Citation Limitations

Application: The court's decision was designated as not suitable for publication and may not be cited in future cases, except as permitted by specific circuit rules.

Reasoning: The court grants counsel's motion to withdraw and dismisses the appeal, stating that this decision is not suitable for publication and may not be cited in future cases except as allowed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.