Case ID: f-appx_228/html/0723-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Florin HORICIANU, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-10303.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 16, 2007 .
    Filed April 18, 2007.
    Mark L. Krotoski, USSJ—Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Jose, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    John J. Jordan, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Florin Horicianu appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and sentence imposed for transmitting interstate threatening communications, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Horicianu’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Horicianu has filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Because our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), indicates that Horicianu knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal and was sentenced within the terms of the 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).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

The appeal is DISMISSED. 
      
      This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.