Court Opinion

ID: 614559
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-10-01 00:05:57+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:50.731184
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                               SEP 30 2011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. 10-10427

               Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00736-DGC

  v.
                                                  MEMORANDUM *
ERNESTO FELIX,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                    David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted September 27, 2011 **

Before:        HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

       Ernesto Felix appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and the 69-month

sentence for illegal re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Felix’s counsel has filed a

brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as

          *
             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).
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. We

dismiss 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.

      DISMISSED.

                                         2                                   10-10427