Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raffie ESKANDARIAN, an individual aka Rafael Eskandarian, aka Seal E, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-17
Citations: 172 F. App'x 163
Docket Number: No. 04-50239
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Raffie ESKANDARIAN, an individual aka Rafael Eskandarian, aka Seal E, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, BEEZER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 172
Pages: 163–164

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Raffie ESKANDARIAN, an individual aka Rafael Eskandarian, aka Seal E, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-50239.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2006.
Decided March 17, 2006.
Douglas A. Axel, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anthony Michael Glassman, Esq., Glass-man, Browning & Salstman, Beverly Hills, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: CANBY, BEEZER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Raffie Eskandarian appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for a refund for overpayment of restitution.
The government contends that dismissal of Eskandarian's appeal is proper under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. See Molinaro v. New Jersey, 396 U.S. 365, 366, 90 S.Ct. 498, 24 L.Ed.2d 586 (1970) (per curiam) (holding that a fugitive is disentitled from calling upon the resources of the court for determination of his claims). Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that exercising our discretion to apply the fugitive disentitlement doctrine to this appeal furthers the punitive and deterrent purposes of the doctrine. See Antonio-Marbinez v. INS, 317 F.3d 1089, 1092-93 (9th Cir.2003). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.
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.