USA V. FRANCISCO ROSALES-HERNANDEZ, No. 13-10506 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT APR 27 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 13-10506 D.C. No. 2:12-cr-01958-SRB v. MEMORANDUM* FRANCISCO ROSALES-HERNANDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 22, 2015** Before: GOODWIN, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Francisco Rosales-Hernandez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 70-month sentence for conspiracy to transport and harbor illegal aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii), (iii) and (v)(1); and conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. * 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). § 1956(h). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), RosalesHernandez’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Rosales-Hernandez has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No answering brief has been filed. Rosales-Hernandez has waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). RosalesHernandez’s contention that the government breached the plea agreement is not supported by the record because Rosales-Hernandez received the three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility that he was promised. Moreover, the district court did not provide an unqualified advisement that Rosales-Hernandez retained the right to appeal. See United States v. Arias-Espinosa, 704 F.3d 616, 618-20 (9th Cir. 2012). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See Watson, 582 F.3d at 988. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. DISMISSED. 2 13-10506
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.
