U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2019

United States v. Miguel Aleman-Garcia

United States v. Miguel Aleman-Garcia
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 24, 2019

United States v. Miguel Aleman-Garcia

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 24 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10332 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:15-cr-01691-JGZ-LAB-1 v. MIGUEL ALEMAN-GARCIA, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 17, 2019** Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Miguel Aleman-Garcia appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Aleman-Garcia’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record.

We have provided Aleman-Garcia the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Aleman-Garcia waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal except as to standard conditions five, six, and fifteen, which are unconstitutionally vague. See United States v. Evans, 883 F.3d 1154, 1162-64 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 139 S. Ct. 133 (2018); see also Watson, 582 F.3d at 977 (an appeal waiver does not bar a constitutional challenge to a supervised release condition). We remand to the district court to modify these conditions consistent with Evans.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED; REMANDED with instructions.

2 18-10332

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.