Court Opinion

ID: 2650895
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-01-25 01:02:28.165267+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:03.838362
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FILED
                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                          JAN 24 2014

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                         U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 13-10272

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00195-NVW

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
MARTIN RAMIREZ-GOVEA,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                      Neil V. Wake, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted January 21, 2014**

Before:        CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

       Martin Ramirez-Govea appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 48-month sentence for reentry of a

removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California,

          *
             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).
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Ramirez-Govea’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 Ramirez-Govea the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental

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

      Ramirez-Govea has waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80

(1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United

States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss

the appeal. See id. at 988.

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      DISMISSED.

                                          2                                   13-10272