Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin TAFOYA-CISNEROS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-12-16
Citations: 83 F. App'x 249
Docket Number: No. 03-10093; D.C. No. CR-02-05346-AWI
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin TAFOYA-CISNEROS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 83
Pages: 249–249

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin TAFOYA-CISNEROS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-10093.
D.C. No. CR-02-05346-AWI.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
Decided Dec. 16, 2003.
David L. Cappa, USF-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
Martin Tafoya-Cisneros, CCCC-Califor-nia City, Correctional Center, California City, CA, Mark A. Lizarraga, Federal Public Defender, Fresno, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before GOODWIN, WALLACE and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Martin Tafoya-Cisneros appeals the judgment of conviction and 33-month sentence, imposed pursuant to his guilty plea for being a previously deported alien found in the United States, 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), Tafoya-Cisneros' counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no 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 may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.