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

United States v. Armando Marino-Nava

United States v. Armando Marino-Nava
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided October 12, 2010
United States v. Armando Marino-Nava

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 12 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS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. 09-10516 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00582-FJM v. MEMORANDUM * ARMANDO MARINO-NAVA, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Frederick J. Martone, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 13, 2010 ** Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Armando Marino-Nava appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 86- month sentence for re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Marino-Nava’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. 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 (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 09-10516

* The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

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