United States of America v. Benjamin Armenta-Icedo, a.k.a. Rogelio Peralta-Peralta

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
BENJAMIN ARMENTA-ICEDO, a.k.a.
Rogelio Peralta-Peralta,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10493
D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00837-MHM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Mary H. Murguia, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 21, 2011**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Benjamin Armenta-Icedo appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 42-
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), Armenta-Icedo’s counsel
FILED
NOV 23 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10493 2
has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to
withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Armenta-Icedo 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. We
dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d
1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --