Case ID: f-appx_414/html/0990-01.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. Daniel Joe KABINTO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-10214.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.
    
    Filed Feb. 22, 2011.
    Dimitra Sampson, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Craig S. Orent, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Daniel Joe Kabinto appeals from the district court’s order recommitting him pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4246. We have jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine, see United States v. Godinez-Ortiz, 563 F.3d 1022, 1026-29 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm.

Kabinto contends that the district court does not have authority pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4246 to recommit him to an institution for a dangerousness assessment. As he concedes, however, this contention is foreclosed by Godinez-Ortiz, 563 F.3d at 1029-32.

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