Court Opinion

ID: 3032637
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-13 22:48:12.620334+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:47.403321
License: Public Domain

FILED
                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              JAN 26 2010

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                     U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 06-10554

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. CR-05-01112-EHC

   v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
 FABIAN IBARRA-QUIROZ,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                              for the District of Arizona
                      Earl H. Carroll, District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted January 11, 2010 **

Before:        BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

        Fabian Ibarra-Quiroz appeals from his jury-trial conviction and 21-month

sentence imposed for illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326.

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

DAT/Research
       Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Ibarra-Quiroz’s

counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion

to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

       Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district

court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

DAT/Research                               2                                    06-10554