Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco Javier CANASTILLO-ARGUELLES, aka Francisco Canastillo-Arguelles, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-23
Citations: 79 F. App'x 306
Docket Number: No. 02-10675; D.C. No. CR-02-00582-JMR
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Francisco Javier CANASTILLO-ARGUELLES, aka Francisco Canastillo-Arguelles, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WARDLAW, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 79
Pages: 306–307

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Francisco Javier CANASTILLO-ARGUELLES, aka Francisco Canastillo-Arguelles, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 02-10675.
D.C. No. CR-02-00582-JMR.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 14, 2003.
Decided Oct. 23, 2003.
Before WARDLAW, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Francisco Javier Canastillo-Arguelles appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for one count of illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), with an enhancement pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). Canastillo-Arguelles's attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and has moved to withdraw as counsel of record on the ground that he failed to discover any arguable issues on appeal. Canastillo-Arguelles has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issues. We therefore GRANT counsel's motion to withdraw and AFFIRM the district court's judgment.
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.