United States of America v. Xochitl Padilla-Barron

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
XOCHITL PADILLA-BARRON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10526
D.C. No. 2:09-CR-01355-NVW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Neil V. Wake, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 19, 2012**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Xochitl Padilla-Barron appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges her guilty-plea conviction and 198-month sentence for conspiracy to
commit hostage taking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1203(a). Pursuant to Anders v.
FILED
JAN 08 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10526 2
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Padilla-Barron’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 Padilla-Barron the opportunity to file a pro se
supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
filed.
Padilla-Barron has waived her right to appeal her conviction and sentence.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United
States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss
the appeal. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
Padilla-Barron’s motion to file late supplemental excerpts of record under
seal is GRANTED.
Padilla-Barron’s pro se motion for appointment of new counsel is DENIED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --