United States of America v. Arnulfo Rosales-Mendoza

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ARNULFO ROSALES-MENDOZA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10387
D.C. No. 4:06-cr-01595-RCC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Arnulfo Rosales-Mendoza appeals from the district court’s order revoking
his supervised release and from the 12-month sentence imposed upon revocation.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Rosales-Mendoza’s counsel
has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to
FILED
OCT 03 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10387 2
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 (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 of 2 --