USA V. ABDIRASHID HARET, No. 19-30060 (9th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FEB 11 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 19-30060 D.C. No. 2:17-cr-00291-JLR-2 v. MEMORANDUM* ABDIRASHID HARET, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 4, 2020** Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. Abdirashid Haret appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea convictions and 168-month sentence for assault of a federal officer and a person assisting a federal officer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1), (b), using a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. * 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). § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii), and robbery of money of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2114(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Haret’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Haret the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Haret’s convictions. We accordingly affirm Haret’s convictions. Haret waived the right to appeal his sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the sentencing waiver, see United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009), we dismiss Haret’s appeal of his sentence. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part. 2 19-30060
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.
