Case ID: f-appx_414/html/0913-01.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. Donnie Lee JONES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-50659.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Jan. 10, 2011.
    
    Filed Jan. 24, 2011.
    Terri Kay Flynn, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Santa Ana, CA, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Donnie Lee Jones, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
    Mark Yanis, Huntington Beach, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Donnie Lee Jones appeals from the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

On appeal, Jones challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to expand the appointment of counsel under the Criminal Justice Act. Jones seeks to collaterally attack the validity of his underlying conviction in order to develop a defense to the revocation of his supervised release. Jones’ collateral challenge to his conviction, which we have previously considered and rejected, is not cognizable in this appeal. “Irrespective of the merits of this claim, an appeal from a probation revocation is not the proper avenue for a collateral attack on the underlying conviction.” See United States v. Simmons, 812 F.2d 561, 563 (9th Cir.1987).

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