United States of America v. Maximiliano Valdovinos- Espinoza

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
MAXIMILIANO VALDOVINOS-
ESPINOZA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10492
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-01124-DCB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 21, 2011**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Maximiliano Valdovinos-Espinoza appeals from his guilty-plea conviction
and 27-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
§ 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Valdovinos-
FILED
NOV 29 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10492 2
Espinoza’s counsel 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
Valdovinos-Espinoza 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 --