From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Ajtun-Perez

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 2, 2007
249 F. App'x 676 (9th Cir. 2007)

Opinion

No. 06-50693.

Submitted September 24, 2007.

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

Filed October 2, 2007.

Anna Lou Tirol, Esq., USSD — Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Lisa M. Bassis, Esq., Law Offices of Lisa Bassis, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Napoleon A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-05-01689-NAJ.

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

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

Mario O. Ajtun-Perez appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a deported 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), Ajtun-Perez's counsel has filed a brief stating that she 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.

Our examination of the brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no arguable issues for review on direct appeal.

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


Summaries of

U.S. v. Ajtun-Perez

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 2, 2007
249 F. App'x 676 (9th Cir. 2007)
Case details for

U.S. v. Ajtun-Perez

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario O. AJTUN-PEREZ…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 2, 2007

Citations

249 F. App'x 676 (9th Cir. 2007)