Case Under Seal, No. 07-50538 (9th Cir. 2010)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED OCT 05 2010 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 07-50538 D.C. No. CR-07-02561-TJW v. MEMORANDUM * JUVENILE MALE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Thomas J. Whelan, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 13, 2010 ** Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Oscar F., a juvenile male, appeals from an adjudication of juvenile delinquency, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 5032, after a finding of guilt by the district court for multiple violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324. We have jurisdiction under 28 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). U.S.C. § 1291. We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Dittman v. California, 191 F.3d 1020, 1027 n.3 (9th Cir. 1999), and we affirm. Oscar F. contends the district court lacked jurisdiction over him because the 18 U.S.C. § 5032 certification was inaccurate. The parties do not dispute that the state authorities did not prosecute Oscar F. for the instant offenses. A de novo review of the record reveals that the United States Attorney accurately certified that the State of California does not have jurisdiction over Oscar F. See United States v. Juvenile Male, 595 F.3d 885, 891-95 (9th Cir. 2010) (concluding that when the appropriate state prosecutor decides not to prosecute a particular juvenile for the specific crime at issue, the state court never obtains jurisdiction over the juvenile); United States v. Male Juvenile, 280 F.3d 1008, 1014 (9th Cir. 2002) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, the district court properly exercised jurisdiction over Oscar F. AFFIRMED. 2 07-50538

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.