U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2010

United States v. Fiorindo Cortesi

United States v. Fiorindo Cortesi
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 2, 2010
390 F. App'x 734

United States v. Fiorindo Cortesi

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 02 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 08-10546 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 1:08-cr-00272-OWW v. FIORINDO CORTESI, MEMORANDUM * Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 19, 2010 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

Fiorindo Cortesi appeals from his bench trial conviction and sentence for interference with agency function, in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.32(a)(1).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Cortesi’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). as counsel of record. By order filed October 5, 2009, we have provided Cortesi the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. Counsel advises that he has been unable to locate Cortesi or serve him with this court’s order. 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 (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.

2 08-10546

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