Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ray Lawrence MONDRAGON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-12-09
Citations: 52 F. App'x 925
Docket Number: No. 01-30062; D.C. No. CR-99-00025-JDS
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ray Lawrence MONDRAGON, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before GOODWIN, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 52
Pages: 925–926

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ray Lawrence MONDRAGON, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 01-30062.
D.C. No. CR-99-00025-JDS.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 2, 2002.
Decided Dec. 9, 2002.
Before GOODWIN, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ray Lawrence Mondragon appeals the sentence imposed upon remand following his conviction by guilty plea for fraudulent use of a social security number and interstate transport of stolen vehicles, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(B) and 18 U.S.C. § 2312.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Mondragon's counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Defendant has filed a supplemental pro se brief.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988) discloses no issues for review. Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
. We decline to address on direct appeal Mondragon's allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Laughlin, 933 F.2d 786, 788-89 (9th Cir.1991) (explaining that such challenges are better suited to collateral proceeding).