United States of America v. Mario Garcia

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
MARIO GARCIA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-30187
D.C. No. 2:06-CR-00096-LRS-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010 **
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and NR SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Mario Garcia appeals from his the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
SEP 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-30187 2
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Garcia’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 provided the appellant 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. Garcia’s request
for new counsel is DENIED.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --