Court Opinion

ID: 868582
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-05-21 20:10:42.630611+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:35:16.504265
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             MAY 21 2013

                                                                        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. 12-50093

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:11-cr-01027-CAS-1

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
DANIEL LOMELI BARREDA, a.k.a.
Daniel Barred Lomeli,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Central District of California
                    Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding

                              Submitted May 14, 2013 **

Before:        LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

       Daniel Lomeli Barreda appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for being an illegal

alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C.

          *
             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).
§ 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Barreda’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 Barreda the opportunity to file a

pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has

been filed.

      Barreda waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, with the

exception of an appeal based on the court’s calculation of his criminal history

category. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to the criminal

history category calculated by the court. We therefore affirm as to that issue. We

dismiss the remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United

States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).

      In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062

(9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it

delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). See

United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding

sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)).

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part; REMANDED to correct the

judgment.

                                           2                                      12-50093