From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Zapata

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 14, 2002
37 F. App'x 885 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion


37 Fed.Appx. 885 (9th Cir. 2002) UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Samuel Mark ZAPATA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 01-10161. D.C. No. CR-00-00447-DFL. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. June 14, 2002

Submitted June 10, 2002.

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, David F. Levi, District Judge, Presiding.

Before RYMER, T.G. NELSON, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.

Samuel Mark Zapata appeals the supervised release terms imposed following his

Page 886.

guilty plea conviction for distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

Zapata contends that the district court abused its discretion by imposing a special condition of supervised release forbidding his association with gang members. The government responds that Zapata waived his right to appeal his sentence pursuant to a written plea agreement. We agree with the government.

Zapata's waiver of his right to appeal must be enforced since (1) his sentence was well below the maximum agreed upon under the written plea agreement; and (2) he does not challenge the knowing and voluntary nature of his guilty plea or waiver of appeal. See United States v. Nunez, 223 F.3d 956, 958 (9th Cir.)(enforcing a defendant's waiver of appeal since (1) the waiver intended to encompass the issue raised; and (2) the defendant waived the issue whether the waiver was knowingly and voluntary), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 921, 122 S.Ct. 272, 151 L.Ed.2d 199 (2001); see also United States v. Bolinger, 940 F.2d 478, 480 (9th Cir.1991) (enforcing a defendant's appeal waiver since the defendant was sentenced below the maximum sentence provided for in the written plea agreement).

Accordingly, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Zapata

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 14, 2002
37 F. App'x 885 (9th Cir. 2002)
Case details for

U.S. v. Zapata

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Samuel Mark…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 14, 2002

Citations

37 F. App'x 885 (9th Cir. 2002)