Court Opinion

ID: 223383
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-08-17 00:02:58+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:59.743584
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             AUG 16 2011

                                                                        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. 10-30145

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:09-cr-05866-RJB

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
JUAN CARLOS JACOBO-IBARRA,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Washington
                     Robert J. Bryan, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted August 11, 2011 **

Before:        THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

       Juan Carlos Jacobo-Ibarra appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and

sentence of 23 months and one week for unlawful entry by eluding examination

and inspection by immigration officers, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(2).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Jacobo-Ibarra’s counsel has

          *
             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).
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 as to the

defendant’s 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                                    10-30145