Court Opinion

ID: 148988
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-06-19 00:02:05+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:07.363184
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              JUN 18 2010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. 09-50378

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:08-cr-01156-AHM

  v.

BLANCA RENDON,                                   MEMORANDUM *

               Defendant - Appellant.

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

                              Submitted May 25, 2010 **

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

       Blanca Rendon appeals from her guilty-plea conviction and three-month

sentence for forged endorsement on treasury check, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 510(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

          *
             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).
      Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Rendon’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 Rendon 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                                        09-50378