United States v. Daniel Kabinto

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Daniel Kabinto

414 F. App'x 990

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 22, 2011

Docket10-10214

StatusUnpublished

This text of 414 F. App'x 990 (United States v. Daniel Kabinto) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Daniel Kabinto, 414 F. App'x 990 (9th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Daniel Joe Kabinto appeals from the district court’s order recommitting him pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4246. We have jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine, see United States v. Godinez-Ortiz, 563 F.3d 1022, 1026-29 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm.

Kabinto contends that the district court does not have authority pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4246 to recommit him to an institution for a dangerousness assessment. As he concedes, however, this contention is foreclosed by Godinez-Ortiz, 563 F.3d at 1029-32.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI