Case ID: f-appx_698/html/0484-02.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. Jose Luis ALVARADO-MANRIQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-50010
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted September 26, 2017 
    
    Filed September 29, 2017
    Alicia Phillip Williams, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Jose Luis Alvarado-Manriquez, Pro Se
    Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges,
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Luis Alvarado-Manriquez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 24-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for improper entry by an alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Alvarado-Manriquez’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Alvarado-Manriquez 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.