Case ID: f-appx_195/html/0560-01.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. Ramiro OLMOS-MAYA, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 05-10624.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 24, 2006.
    
    Filed July 28, 2006.
    Bruce M. Ferg, Esq., USTU — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Richard Madril, Esq., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Ramiro Olmos-Maya, Safford, AZ, pro se.
    Before: ALARCÓN, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ramiro Olmos-Maya appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 48-month sentence for illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1826.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Olmos-Maya has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief has been filed.

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 Olmos-Maya 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 may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.