Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elbis Saul MARTINEZ-ESCALON, a.k.a. Elbis Saul Martinez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-01-16
Citations: 505 F. App'x 629
Docket Number: No. 12-10096
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elbis Saul MARTINEZ-ESCALON, a.k.a. Elbis Saul Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 505
Pages: 629–630

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elbis Saul MARTINEZ-ESCALON, a.k.a. Elbis Saul Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-10096.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 15, 2013.
Filed Jan. 16, 2013.
Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S., USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Florence Bruemmer, Law Offices of Florence M. Bruemmer, PC, Anthem, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and NGUYEN, 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
Elbis Saul Martinez-Escalon appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea 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), Martinez-Escalon'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 Martinez-Escalon 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.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.