Case ID: f-appx_294/html/0312-01.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. Armando RODRIGUEZ-PALOMARES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-50665.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.
    
    Filed Sept. 23, 2008.
    Christopher A. Ott, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Gordon S. Brownell, Esq., St. Helen, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Armando Rodriguez-Palomares appeals from his bench-trial conviction and 54-month sentence for attempted 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), Rodriguez-Palomares’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Appellant has filed a pro se supplemental brief. No 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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.