From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Rodriguez-Alvarado

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Jul 28, 2015
610 F. App'x 683 (9th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 14-10536

07-28-2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JESUS ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ-ALVARADO, a.k.a. Jesus Albe Rodriguez-Alvarado, Defendant - Appellant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00634-GMS MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding
Before: CANBY, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

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

Jesus Alberto Rodriguez-Alvarado appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Rodriguez-Alvarado'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 Rodriguez-Alvarado the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Rodriguez-Alvarado waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.

Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

United States v. Rodriguez-Alvarado

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Jul 28, 2015
610 F. App'x 683 (9th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Rodriguez-Alvarado

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JESUS ALBERTO…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jul 28, 2015

Citations

610 F. App'x 683 (9th Cir. 2015)