U.S. v. GUTIERREZ-JIMENEZ, 304 Fed.Appx. 493 (9th Cir. 2008)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JoelGUTIERREZ-JIMENEZ, aka Joel Jimenez-Gutierrez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-10594.United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Submitted November 24, 2008.[fn*]
Filed December 3, 2008.
[fn*] The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P.34(a)(2).
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]
John Zachary Boyle, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Joel Gutierrez-Jimenez, White Deer, PA, pro se.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Frederick J. Martone, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-05-01504-FJM.
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM[fn**]
[fn**] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Joel Gutierrez-Jimenez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 78-month sentence for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant toAnders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396,18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Gutierrez-Jimenez's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counselPage 494
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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300
(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.