U.S. v. AISPURO-VIDANA, 249 Fed.Appx. 674 (9th Cir. 2007)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Noe AISPURO-VIDANA,Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-10761.United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Submitted September 24, 2007.[fn*]
Filed October 2, 2007.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.][fn*] This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P.34(a)(2).
James R. Knapp, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anders V. Rosenquist, Jr., Esq., Rosenquist Associates, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.Page 675
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Mary H. Murguia, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-05-01178-MHM.
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM[fn**]
Noe Aispuro-Vidana appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. ยง 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v.California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493
(1967), Aispuro-Vidana's counsel has filed a brief stating that he finds no meritorious issues for review, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Because the record indicates that Aispuro-Vidana knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal.SeeUnited States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, we GRANT counsel's motion to withdraw.
DISMISSED.
[fn**] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.