United States of America v. Arturo Gallegos-Diaz, a.k.a. Alaquin and Nahum Copado-Nieto

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ARTURO GALLEGOS-DIAZ,
a.k.a. Alaquin and Nahum Copado-Nieto,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-30074
D.C. No. 2:08-cr-00144-JLR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Arturo Gallegos-Diaz appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 216-
month sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of
FILED
APR 15 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-30074 2
21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Gallegos-Diaz’s
counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion
to withdraw as counsel of record. We have considered the claims raised by
Gallegos-Diaz’s pro se letter submitted on June 19, 2009. No 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, Gallegos-Diaz’s
request for appointment of new counsel is denied, and the district court’s judgment
is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --