Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cesar S. CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-11-02
Citations: 351 F. App'x 216
Docket Number: No. 08-30274
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cesar S. CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, LEAVY, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 351
Pages: 216–217

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cesar S. CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-30274.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 13, 2009.
Filed Nov. 2, 2009.
Katherine Jill Bolton, Assistant U.S., Gregory M. Shogren, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USSP-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Dan Bruce Johnson, Dan B. Johnson, P.S., Spokane, WA, Cesar S. Contreras, Fort Dix, NJ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: B. FLETCHER, LEAVY, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Cesar S. Contreras appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following modification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Contreras' 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. However, the appellant has filed a motion opposing the motion to withdraw and, alternatively, requesting appointment of new counsel.
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.
The appellant's motion is DENIED.
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 provid ed by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.