United States v. Mynor Rene Rosales

33 F.3d 60
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 15, 1994
Docket93-50516
StatusPublished
Cited by37 cases

This text of 33 F.3d 60 (United States v. Mynor Rene Rosales) 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. Mynor Rene Rosales, 33 F.3d 60 (9th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

33 F.3d 60
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Mynor Rene ROSALES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 93-50516.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted July 17, 1994.
Decided Aug. 17, 1994.
Memorandum Withdrawn Dec. 15, 1994.

Before: POOLE and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges; TANNER,* District Judge.

MEMORANDUM**

Rosales appeals from the imposition of a 180 month sentence imposed upon his pleas of guilty to violations of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924(c) and (d)(1). He challenges the district court's inclusion of a 1982 conviction for manslaughter and a 1990 conviction for sale of a controlled substance. He argues that these two prior convictions were based on unconstitutionally obtained guilty pleas, and thus should have been excluded from computation of his criminal history category. We disagree.

In United States v. Fondren, No. 93-50470, slip op. ---- (9th Cir. August 12, 1994), we held that pursuant to Custis v. United States, 114 S.Ct. 1732 (1994) a defendant has no right in his federal sentencing proceeding to challenge the constitutionality of prior convictions used to enhance his federal sentence, unless those convictions were obtained in violation of the right to counsel. Rosales does not argue that he was not represented by counsel when he pleaded guilty in 1982 and 1990. Rosales' arguments are foreclosed by Fondren.

AFFIRMED.

*

The Honorable Jack E. Tanner, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation

**

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

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

Related

United States v. Michael Charles Griggs
50 F.3d 17 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)
United States v. Robert Brian Boeckman
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Mohd Shahzad Ali
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Arthur Lee Duran
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. James Banh
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. James Garfield Roane
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Manuel Sanchez-Valencia
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Michael David Thomas
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Clifford Dann
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Antonio Barragan-Arellano
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Joseph Louis Tokash
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Logan Dee Underwood
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. John Patrick Laughlin
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Joe v. Gonzalez
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Kelvin Neal
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Jeffrey Lynn Jones
33 F.3d 60 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 F.3d 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mynor-rene-rosales-ca9-1994.