United States v. Abdul-Salam

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 27 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-4753 D.C. No. 4:21-cr-06042-MKD-12 Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MEMORANDUM* AMAR F. ABDUL-SALAM, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington Mary K. Dimke, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 22, 2025** Before: CLIFTON, CALLAHAN, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges. Amar F. Abdul-Salam appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and sentence of 12 months and 1 day for multiple counts of mail fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343, 1347, and 1349. * 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).  Abdul-Salam’s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no non-frivolous arguments for appeal. Abdul- Salam has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. In the plea agreement, Abdul-Salam waived the right to appeal the conviction. We dismiss the appeal as to the conviction because we find no non- frivolous issues as to whether the appeal waiver is enforceable as to the conviction. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). The waiver does not bar Abdul-Salam’s appeal of his sentence because the district court applied Guidelines adjustments to which Abdul-Salam did not agree. However, our independent review of the record, see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no non-frivolous arguments to be made on direct appeal with respect to the sentence. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. DISMISSED in part; AFFIRMED in part. 2 24-4753