Case ID: f-appx_677/html/0399-01.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. Latuniua POHAHAU, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-10051
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted February 14, 2017 
    
    Filed February 21, 2017
    Chris Alan Thomas, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—-Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, Plaintiff-Appellee
    Pamela O’Leary Tower, Attorney, Pamela O’Leary Tower Attorney at Law, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Latuniua Pohahau appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We dismiss.

Pohahau contends that the district court violated his Sixth Amendment right to be present at sentencing when it failed to orally pronounce the conditions of supervised release contained in the written judgment. The government argues that the appeal should be dismissed based on the appeal waiver contained in the parties’ plea agreement. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 981 (9th Cir. 2009), we dismiss. The district court did not violate Pohahau’s Sixth Amendment rights. Pohahau’s counsel expressly waived Pohahau’s right to hear the conditions of supervised release in light of the fact that Pohahau had heard the same conditions earlier that day when he was sentenced in another criminal case. See generally Campbell v. Wood, 18 F.3d 662, 671-72 (9th Cir. 1994) (en banc) (Sixth Amendment right to be present may be waived). Accordingly, the appeal waiver contained in the plea agreement is enforceable. See Watson, 582 F.3d at 988.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.