Case ID: f-appx_386/html/0597-01.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. Hector CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-10328.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted June 18, 2010.
    Filed July 2, 2010.
    Susan Cushman, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Richard T. Pafundi, Office of Richard T. Pafundi Attorney at Law, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: B. FLETCHER, PREGERSON and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Appellant Hector Cruz pled guilty to distributing 50 grams or more of methamphetamine and agreed to a waiver of the right to appeal. In exchange, the government dropped all other charges against him. His attorney has filed an Anders brief in this appeal and has moved to withdraw as counsel. Cruz has filed no pro se supplemental brief in response to the court’s invitation to do so.

Having examined the record, we conclude that Cruz entered into the plea agreement and agreed to the waiver of appellate rights knowingly and voluntarily, and that the district court complied with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000).

The waiver of appellate rights to which Cruz agreed waives any challenge to his sentence, unless the sentence exceeded the applicable guideline range as determined by the district court, which it did not. Thus, the waiver applies to any possible challenge to Cruz’s sentence, with two recognized exceptions: a claim that the sentence did not comport with the terms of the plea agreement, and a claim that the sentence violated the law. See United States v. Bibler, 495 F.3d 621, 624 (9th Cir.2007). Here, however, the sentence comported with the terms of the plea agreement and is not unlawful. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

DISMISSED; COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     
      
      . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).