Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel Alexis ROMERO-GIRON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-06-17
Citations: 579 F. App'x 560
Docket Number: No. 13-10162
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel Alexis ROMERO-GIRON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 579
Pages: 560–561

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel Alexis ROMERO-GIRON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-10162.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 12, 2014.
Filed June 17, 2014.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Francisco Leon, Esquire, Law Office of Francisco Leon, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Joel Alexis Romero-Giron, White Deer, PA, pro se.
Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and M. SMITH, 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
Joel Alexis Romero-Giron appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his jury-trial conviction and 51-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Romero-Giron'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 provided Romero-Giron 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
Romero-Giron's pro se motion for appointment of new counsel is DENIED.
The government's motion to allow late filing of the Anders letter is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.