Case ID: f-appx_9/html/0778-01.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. Pete NAVA-GOMEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 00-10482. D.C. No. CR 00-742-RCC.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 14, 2001
      
      .
    
    Decided May 30, 2001.
    
      Before PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and WARD LAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      . The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Pete Nava-Gomez appeals his conviction by guilty plea and sentence for transportation of illegal aliens in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(l)(A)(ii). Nava-Gomez’s attorney has moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Nava-Gomez did not file a pro se supplemental brief.

Nava-Gomez’s plea agreement contains an express waiver of the right to appeal the entry of judgment and the imposition of sentence. Because our independent review of the record indicates that the plea agreement, including the waiver of the right to appeal, was entered knowingly and voluntarily, United States v. Aguilar-Muniz, 156 F.3d 974, 976 (9th Cir.1998) (waiver of right to appeal is valid if knowing and volutary), we enforce the waiver, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and dismiss the appeal.

DISMISSED. 
      
      . This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.