Case ID: f-appx_430/html/0587-01.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. VICTOR GONZALEZ-CUEVAS, a.k.a. Victor Manuel Gonzalez-Cuevas, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor Gonzalez-Cuevas, a.k.a. Victor Manuel Gonzalez-Cuevas, Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 09-10437, 09-10438.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 20, 2011.
    
    Filed April 28, 2011.
    Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Brick P. Storts, III, Esquire, Barton & Storts, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Victor Gonzalez-Cuevas appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 51-month sentence for illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He also appeals from the four-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Gonzalez-Cuevas’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.

Counsel’s motions for ruling are denied as moot.

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.