Court Opinion

ID: 215678
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-04-29 00:01:50+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:25.211695
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                               APR 28 2011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. 09-10165

               Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00080-FJM

  v.
                                                  MEMORANDUM *
BRAULIO RIVERA-ANDRACA, a.k.a.
Jorge Perez-Ortiz,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                   Frederick J. Martone, District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted April 20, 2011 **

Before:        RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

       Braulio Rivera-Andraca appeals form the 22-month sentence imposed

following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal re-entry after deportation, in

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

          *
             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).
(1967), Rivera-Andraca’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                                    09-10165