Case ID: f-appx_688/html/0438-01.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. George GERALDO, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-30212
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 11, 2017 
    
    Filed April 19, 2017
    Tara Elliott, USMI — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Missoula, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee
    John Rhodes, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FDMT — Federal Defenders of Montana (Missoula), Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant
    George Geraldo, Pro Se
    Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      
         The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument, See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

George Geraldo appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 132-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Geral-do’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 considered Geraldo’s 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Geraldo’s conviction. We accordingly affirm Geraldo’s conviction.

Geraldo waived the right to appeal his sentence. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the sentencing waiver, we dismiss Geraldo’s appeal as to his sentence. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

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