Filed: May 08, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 8 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10430 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:16-cr-00737-CKJ v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE SANTILLAN-MORALES, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 8, 2017** Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. Jose Santillan-Morales
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 8 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10430 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:16-cr-00737-CKJ v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE SANTILLAN-MORALES, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 8, 2017** Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. Jose Santillan-Morales a..
More
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 8 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10430
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:16-cr-00737-CKJ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JOSE SANTILLAN-MORALES,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 8, 2017**
Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Jose Santillan-Morales appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 16-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), Santillan-Morales’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record.
We have provided Santillan-Morales 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-10430