Case ID: f-appx_75/html/0633-01.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. Guadalupe GALVEZ-MUJICA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-30197.
    D.C. No. CR-01-00076-SEH.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Sept. 16, 2003.
    Joshua Van De Wetering, Asst U.S. Atty, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Dean D. Chisholm, Columbia Falls, MT, 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

Guadalupe Galvez-Mujica appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 121-month sentence imposed for conspiring to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841. GalveznMujica’s attorney has filed a brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Galvez-Mujica has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Our review of the Anders brief and our independent review of the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no issues requiring further 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.