From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Garcia-Cruz

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 27, 2014
581 F. App'x 640 (9th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

Submitted June 25, 2014

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. D.C. No. 4:12-cr-50231-DCB. David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding.

For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee: Christina Marie Cabanillas, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU- Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ.

ARSENIO GARCIA-CRUZ, Defendant - Appellant, Pro se, Taft, CA.


Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Arsenio Garcia-Cruz appeals from the revocation of supervised release and six-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Garcia-Cruz'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 Garcia-Cruz 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Garcia-Cruz

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 27, 2014
581 F. App'x 640 (9th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

United States v. Garcia-Cruz

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ARSENIO GARCIA-CRUZ…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 27, 2014

Citations

581 F. App'x 640 (9th Cir. 2014)