Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee. v. Jose Juan AYON ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-08-19
Citations: 142 F. App'x 360
Docket Number: No. 04-7137
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee. v. Jose Juan AYON ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before EBEL, McKAY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 142
Pages: 360–361

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee. v. Jose Juan AYON ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-7137.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Aug. 19, 2005.
D. Michael Littlefield, Asst. U.S. Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Muskogee, OK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jose Juan Ayon Romero, Muskogee, OK, pro se.
Before EBEL, McKAY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
MONROE G. McKAY, Circuit Judge.
After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Defendant pled guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced him to ninety-six months' incarceration followed by a sixty-month term of supervised release. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. Rec., Vol. 1, Tab. 17. Thereafter, Defendant's counsel filed a brief following the mandate of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), accompanied by a Motion to Withdraw. Defendant also filed a brief articulating the bases he believes entitle him to relief.
According to Defendant's counsel, there are no arguable appealable issues. Aplt. Anders Br. at 6-9. We have reviewed the record on appeal, as well as Defendant's brief, and conclude that counsel is correct in determining that there are no non-frivolous issues that can be raised; nothing indicates that the district court erred under United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), when it imposed Defendant's sentence. Counsel's brief contains a certificate of service indicating that Defendant was furnished with a copy of counsel's brief on April 21, 2005. Id. at 11. Accordingly, we GRANT counsel's Motion to Withdraw and AFFIRM the decision of the trial court.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.