United States of America v. Jose Carrillo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOSE CARRILLO,
Defendant - Appellant.
Nos. 12-50528
13-50029
D.C. Nos. 2:08-cr-01290-MMM
2:12-cr-00328-MMM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 17, 2013**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Jose Carrillo appeals from his guilty-plea
conviction and 70-month sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United
States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326; and the revocation of
supervised release and the sentence of seven months and 14 days imposed upon
FILED
DEC 30 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 panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Carrillo’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 Carrillo the
opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or
answering brief has been filed.
Carrillo waived his right to appeal his conviction with the exception of an
appeal based a claim that his plea was involuntary. He also waived the right to
appeal his sentences with the exception of the court’s calculation of his criminal
history category. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v.
Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to
Carrillo’s plea, the revocation of supervised release, or the criminal history
category calculated by the court. We therefore affirm as to those issues. We
dismiss the remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waivers. See United
States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
12-50528 & 13-50029 2

-- 2 of 2 --