Court Opinion

ID: 6332244
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-04-15 20:00:24.418042+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:18.200591
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       APR 15 2022
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    21-10293

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No.
                                                4:21-cr-00856-CKJ-LAB-1
 v.

ISAIAS GALAN-CORTES, AKA Isaias                 MEMORANDUM*
Cortez, AKA Isaias Galan Cortes,

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Arizona
                   Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted April 11, 2022**

Before:      McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

      Isaias Galan-Cortes appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 21-month sentence for reentry of a

removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), Galan-Cortes’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We

have provided Galan-Cortes 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2                                 21-10293