Case Explained: USA V. CASTRO, JR.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-17 Docket: 2:23-cr-01527-SMM-1 The ninth-circuit dismissed Israel Castro’s appeal of his criminal conviction based on a valid appellate waiver contained in his plea agreement. The court applied the standard that an appeal waiver is enforceable if its language encompasses the grounds raised and was knowingly and voluntarily made, noting that jurisdiction to review such waivers is limited to determining whether they are valid or if an exception for a “miscarriage of justice” applies under *Hunter v. United States*. This exception requires showing that the sentence is marred by egregious error bringing the judicial system into disrepute. The court rejected Castro’s arguments that the district court impermissibly considered his nationality and failed to follow the specific procedural steps for applying a mitigated role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. The court held that mere mention of nationality does not constitute an aggravating factor, and sentencing guideline determinations are waivable matters of law rather than procedural due process violations. Furthermore, regarding the role adjustment, the court ruled that district courts are not required to explicitly “tick off” every factor or mechanically analyze each element on the record, as there is a presumption that judges know the law and consider all relevant factors. Consequently, the alleged errors did not meet the high bar for a miscarriage of justice. The practical consequence is that Castro’s appeal is dismissed without review of the merits of his sentencing claims, effectively upholding the district court’s judgment. The court also granted Castro’s motions to lift the stay of proceedings and to supplement or correct the record as part of the dismissal process. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.