From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Ibarra-Garcia

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 23, 2006
203 F. App'x 777 (9th Cir. 2006)

Opinion

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Orlando B. Gutierrez, USSD-Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Gordon S. Brownell, Esq., St. Helena, CA, Martin Ibarra-Garcia, California City, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-03-01282-RTB.

Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Martin Ibarra-Garcia appeals from the judgment imposed following a jury-trial

Page 778.

conviction for being an alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ibarra-Garcia's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Ibarra-Garcia filed a pro se supplemental brief, and the Government filed an answering brief.

Our independent review of the briefs and 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 grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Ibarra-Garcia

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 23, 2006
203 F. App'x 777 (9th Cir. 2006)
Case details for

United States v. Ibarra-Garcia

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Martin IBARRA-GARCIA…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 23, 2006

Citations

203 F. App'x 777 (9th Cir. 2006)