United States v. Salinas ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                                                                        F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES CO URT O F APPEALS
    April 18, 2007
    FO R TH E TENTH CIRCUIT                 Elisabeth A. Shumaker
    Clerk of Court
    U N ITED STA TES O F A M ER ICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.                                                    No. 07-6002
    (D.C. No. CR-06-181-1-C)
    M IKE ROBERT SALINAS,                                (W .D. Okla.)
    Defendant-Appellant.
    OR D ER AND JUDGM ENT *
    Before KELLY, HA RTZ, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.
    Defendant M ike Robert Salinas pled guilty to possession with intent to
    distribute marijuana. Pursuant to the plea agreement, he waived his right to
    appeal his conviction or his sentence, provided his sentence was within or below
    the advisory guideline range, as determined by the sentencing court. Defendant’s
    sentence w as w ithin the advisory guideline range. Nevertheless, proceeding pro
    se, defendant filed a notice of appeal.
    *
    This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not
    materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2);
    10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral
    argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited,
    however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and
    10th Cir. R. 32.1.
    The government filed a motion to enforce the plea agreement pursuant to
    United States v. Hahn, 
    359 F.3d 1315
     (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (per curiam).
    Defendant’s trial counsel moved to withdraw and we granted that motion and
    appointed new counsel, M s. Hartfield. M s. Hartfield responded to the
    government’s motion to enforce by stating that she had thoroughly reviewed the
    record and conferred with defendant and had concluded that there is no
    non-frivolous argument that defendant may raise on appeal. M s. Hartfield further
    stated that defendant concedes that the government’s motion to enforce is
    meritorious and that he does not contest the motion.
    Accordingly, we GRANT the motion and DISM ISS the appeal. The
    mandate shall issue forthwith.
    ENTERED FOR THE COURT
    PER CURIAM
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-6002

Judges: Kelly, Hartz, Gorsuch

Filed Date: 4/18/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024