Case ID: f-appx_74/html/0832-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel LOPEZ-AYALA, aka Miguel Angel Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-10059.
    D.C. No. CR-01-00765-RCC.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Sept. 15, 2003.
    
      Julia Soto, USTU-Ofñce of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Enrique R. Gonzales, Nogales, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before PREGERSON, THOMAS and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Miguel Angel Lopez-Ayala appeals his conviction and 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lopez-Ayala's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no arguable issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our examination of the brief and independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no issues warranting review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.