United States of America v. Sebastian Orejel-Gomez

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
SEBASTIAN OREJEL-GOMEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10448
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-00767-RCC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Sebastian Orejel-Gomez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction for re-entry
after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Orejel-Gomez’s counsel has filed a brief stating
there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of
FILED
SEP 30 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10448 2
record. We have provided the appellant 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 --