United States of America v. JOSE MANUEL MENDOZA-RAMIREZ, AKA Jose Manuel Mendoza

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
JOSE MANUEL MENDOZA-RAMIREZ,
AKA Jose Manuel Mendoza,
Defendant - Appellant.,
No. 10-50215
D.C. No. 8:09-cr-00013-DOC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2011**
San Francisco, California
Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Jose Manuel Mendoza-Ramirez appeals from the 57-month sentence
imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an illegal alien found in the
FILED
OCT 03 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-50215
United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Mendoza-Ramirez’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 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.
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1065-66
(9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it
delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to section 1326(b). See United
States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte
to delete the reference to section 1326(b)).
Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, the district
court’s judgment is AFFIRMED, and the case is REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --