Case ID: f-appx_156/html/0962-01.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. Ronald HOLLIS, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 05-10101.
    D.C. No. CR-04-50105-JMR/JCC.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Dec. 7, 2005.
    
    Decided Dec. 9, 2005.
    Celeste Corlett, USTU — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Saul M. Huerta, Jr., Esq., FPDAZ— Federal Public Defender’s Office, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before KOZINSKI and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges, and BENITEZ, District Judge.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ronald Hollis appeals special conditions five, six, and eight of his supervised release. Hollis had filed objections to these conditions but voluntarily withdrew those objections at the dispositional hearing. His intentional withdrawal of the objections constitutes a waiver of these issues for purposes of appeal. See United States v. Manante, 44 F.3d 1407, 1419 n. 18 (9th Cir.1995) (“[W]ithdrawal of an objection is tantamount to waiver of an issue for appeal.”); see also United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (“Whereas forfeiture is the failure to make the timely assertion of a right, waiver is the intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). AFFIRMED. 
      
       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.