United States v. De La Rosa-Lopez

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-5201

D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 2:22-cr-00106-APG-NJK-1 v.

MEMORANDUM* JOSE CARLOS DE LA ROSA- LOPEZ, AKA Antonio Perez- Gonzalez, AKA Francisco,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 21, 2025**

Before: SILVERMAN, LEE, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

Jose Carlos De La Rosa-Lopez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. (b)(1)(A)(i), and 846, and conspiracy to launder monetary instruments in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(A)(i), (h).

De La Rosa-Lopez’s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no non-frivolous arguments for appeal. De La Rosa-Lopez has filed a pro se supplemental brief.

In the plea agreement, De La Rosa-Lopez waived his right to appeal the conviction and sentence.

Our independent review of the record, see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no non-frivolous issue as to whether the appeal waiver is enforceable. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). De La Rosa-Lopez’s argument in his pro se brief that the district court erred by imposing an aggravating role adjustment is covered by the appeal waiver. We therefore do not decide that issue, and we dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

DISMISSED.

2 24-5201