Filed: Nov. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 25 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-10173 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:18-cr-02600-RM-DTF-1 v. MEMORANDUM* CARLOS ANTONIO CASTILLO-ROJO, AKA Carlos Castillo-Rojo, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Rosemary Márquez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2019** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTE
Summary: NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 25 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-10173 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:18-cr-02600-RM-DTF-1 v. MEMORANDUM* CARLOS ANTONIO CASTILLO-ROJO, AKA Carlos Castillo-Rojo, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Rosemary Márquez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2019** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN..
More
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 25 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-10173
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:18-cr-02600-RM-DTF-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CARLOS ANTONIO CASTILLO-ROJO,
AKA Carlos Castillo-Rojo,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Rosemary Márquez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2019**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Antonio Castillo-Rojo appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 30-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), Castillo-Rojo’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are
*
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).
no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We
have provided Castillo-Rojo 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 19-10173