United States v. Raymond Salazar, Jr. , 693 F. App'x 565 ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 3 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 17-10097
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00369-WHO
v.
MEMORANDUM*
RAYMOND SALAZAR, Jr.,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William Horsley Orrick, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2017**
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Raymond Salazar, Jr., appeals from the district court’s order affirming the
magistrate judge’s denial of his motion for early termination of probation. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Salazar contends that the magistrate judge erred by applying an incorrect
*
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).
legal standard in denying his motion for early termination. Specifically, he asserts
that the magistrate judge incorrectly required that he demonstrate “exceptionally
good behavior” as a prerequisite to early termination. The government responds
that Salazar’s claim is barred by the appeal waiver contained in the parties’ plea
agreement. We decline to enforce the waiver and instead affirm on the merits. See
United States v. Jacobo Castillo, 496 F.3d 947, 957 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc). The
magistrate judge did not abuse her discretion in denying Salazar’s motion. See
United States v. Nixon, 839 F.3d 885, 887 (9th Cir. 2016) (reviewing denial of
request to modify conditions of probation for abuse of discretion). Contrary to
Salazar’s contention, the record reflects that the magistrate judge applied the
correct legal standard when she considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and
determined that Salazar’s mere compliance with the conditions of probation,
without more, did not warrant early termination. See 18 U.S.C. § 3564(c).
AFFIRMED.
2 17-10097