Case ID: f-appx_357/html/0955-01.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. Mirno PLIEGO-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-50233.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
    
    Filed Dec. 16, 2009.
    Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Eric Vandevelde, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jerry Sies, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Mirno Pliego-Sanchez, Leavanworth, KS, pro se.
    Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Mirno Pliego-Sanchez appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed for his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Pliego-Sanchez’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.