Unpublished Disposition, 940 F.2d 1537 (9th Cir. 1991)

 Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 940 F.2d 1537 (9th Cir. 1991)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appelleev.Luis Vargas TOVAR, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 89-50163.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 6, 1991.* Decided Aug. 6, 1991.

Before D.W. NELSON, O'SCANNLAIN and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Luis Vargas Tovar appeals his conviction for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, see 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a) (1), 846 (1988). Tovar's counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), requesting withdrawal unless the court can identify a nonfrivolous ground for appeal.1 

We perceive no ground for appeal. Tovar's stipulation of facts preserved for appeal the court's pretrial ruling on his motion for suppression of physical evidence. However, Tovar's conviction was based upon stipulated facts which were marshalled entirely independent of Tovar's arrest in the Covina apartment and his post-arrest statements to officers. A possible ground for appeal, whether the evidence in the stipulated facts was sufficient to convict, was waived in the stipulation voluntarily entered into by Tovar. Even if an assertion of ineffective assistance of counsel arising from the circumstances of Tovar's entrance into the stipulation were made, it would not be properly raised on direct appeal.

Counsel's request for withdrawal is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED and APPEAL DISMISSED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs and without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a), Ninth Circuit R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit R. 36-3

 1

Tovar was notified of his right to file a supplemental brief pro se and did not exercise that right. The government did not file a brief in response to the Anders brief

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.