Case ID: f-appx_261/html/0970-01.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. Jose ORTIZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-50744.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 3, 2007.
    
    Filed Dec. 28, 2007.
    US Attorneys Office, USSD—Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Steven A. Feldman, Esq., Uniondale, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Ortiz appeals from his jury-trial conviction and 120-month sentence for importation of marijuana, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and bail jumping, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 952 and 960, and 18 U.S.C. § 3146. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ortiz’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 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 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.