United States of America v. Sergio Delgado Montoya, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar, a.k.a. Fernando Escobar-Jimenez

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SERGIO DELGADO MONTOYA, a.k.a.
Fernando Escobar, a.k.a. Fernando
Escobar-Jimenez,
Defendant - Appellant.
Nos. 12-10662
12-10663
D.C. Nos. 4:12-cr-01405-CKJ
4:12-cr-50164-CKJ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Mark W. Bennett, District Judge, Presiding**
Submitted November 19, 2013***
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Sergio Delgado Montoya appeals his guilty-
FILED
DEC 06 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the
Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.
*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

plea conviction and 30-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in violation of
8 U.S.C. § 1326; and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive 24-
month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), Delgado Montoya’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 Delgado Montoya the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental
brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Delgado Montoya has waived his right to appeal his conviction and
sentence, and his right to appeal the revocation of supervised release and the
sentence imposed upon revocation. 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 waivers. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th
Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss these appeals. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
12-10662 & 12-10663 2

-- 2 of 2 --