Court Opinion

ID: 3039819
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-13 23:01:42.93692+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:07:04.407924
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                               OCT 12 2010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. 09-30420

               Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 4:07-cr-00032-SEH

  v.
                                                  MEMORANDUM *
ROMAN WAYNE ENCINAS,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Montana
                     Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted September 13, 2010 **

Before:        SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

       Roman Wayne Encinas appeals from the 110-month sentence imposed

following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine,

in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), Encinas’ counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief,

          *
             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).
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 as to Encinas’

conviction. We dismiss the appeal of the sentence in light of the valid appeal

waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      The conviction is AFFIRMED, and the appeal of the sentence is

DISMISSED.

                                          2                                      09-30420