Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rafael MADRIGAL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-15
Citations: 421 F. App'x 718
Docket Number: No. 09-30039
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rafael MADRIGAL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 421
Pages: 718–719

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rafael MADRIGAL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-30039.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2011.
Filed March 15, 2011.
Anthony G. Hall, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kevin Thomas Maloney, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Boise, ID, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
J.D. Merris, Boise, ID, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Rafael Madrigal appeals from: (1) his guilty-plea conviction and 130-month sentence for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a); (2) his guilty-plea conviction and concurrent 120-month sentence for unlawful possession of an unregistered firearm, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5841 and 5861(d); and (3) the order of forfeiture under 26 U.S.C. § 5872 and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c). Pursuant to Anders v. Califor nia, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Madrigal'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 with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. A supplemental brief and answering brief have 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 arguable 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.