Court Opinion

ID: 3064274
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-14 22:16:37.224658+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:24:04.841242
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             FEB 29 2012

                                                                        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. 11-10040

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 4:09-cr-02814-DCB-
                                                 JJM-1
  v.

JESUS IVAN BARRON-GARCIA,                        MEMORANDUM *

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                     David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted February 21, 2012 **

Before:        FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

       Jesus Ivan Barron-Garcia appeals from his 51-month sentence imposed after

his guilty-plea conviction for being found in the United States after removal, in

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

(1967), Barron-Garcia’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for

          *
             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).
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                                    11-10040