Court Opinion

ID: 148564
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-06-15 00:01:40+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:36.234915
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JUN 14 2010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. 09-30265

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 1:08-cr-00230-EJL

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
JUAN BERNARDO PANIAGUA-
PACHECO,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                              for the District of Idaho
                     Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding

                              Submitted May 25, 2010 **

Before:        CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

       Juan Bernardo Paniagua-Pacheco appeals from his guilty-plea conviction

and 87-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation

          *
             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).
of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), Paniagua-Pacheco’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.

                                          2                                    09-30265