United States v. Mustafa Ahmad Naushad
- Proceeding
- appeal
- Trial court
- United States District Court for the Southern District of California
- Trial judge
- William Q. Hayes (district judge)
- Outcome
- affirmed — AFFIRMED.
- Area
- civil
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 5 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-56391 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 3:16-cv-01307-WQH 3:10-cr-02792-WQH v. MUSTAFA AHMAD NAUSHAD, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 27, 2018** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
The stay issued in this appeal on January 26, 2018, is lifted.
Mustafa Ahmad Naushad appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253, and we affirm.
* 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). Naushad contends that his armed bank robbery conviction under 18 U.S.C.
§ 2113(a), (d) does not qualify as a predicate crime of violence under 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c). This argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Watson, 881 F.3d 782 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 139 S. Ct. 203 (2018).
Appellee’s motion for summary affirmance is denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-56391