U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2009

United States v. Ochoa-Encinas

United States v. Ochoa-Encinas
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided October 9, 2009 · Clifton, Rawlinson, Silverman
334 F. App'x 105

United States v. Ochoa-Encinas

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Ramiro Ochoa-Encinas appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 48-month sentence for attempted re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ochoa-Encinas’ counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

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

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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.