USA V. MIGUEL ALVAREZ-ADAME, No. 10-50161 (9th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 19 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff -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. 10-50161 D.C. No. 3:07-cr-00059-LAB v. MEMORANDUM * MIGUEL ALVAREZ-ADAME, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 17, 2012 ** Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Miguel Alvarez-Adame appeals from the 110-month sentence imposed following his conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 * 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). (1967), Alvarez-Adame s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Alvarez-Adame filed a pro se supplemental brief and the government filed an answering brief. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 109 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. We decline to reconsider Alvarez-Adame s challenge to the validity of the underlying deportation order because this court already decided that issue in United States v. Alvarez-Adame, 346 Fed. Appx. 169 (9th Cir. 2009). See United States v. Scrivner, 189 F.3d 825, 827 (9th Cir. 1999) (under the law of the case doctrine, one panel of an appellate court will not reconsider questions which another panel has decided on a prior appeal in the same case). In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to section 1326(b)). Counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED and REMANDED to correct the judgment. 2 10-50161
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.
