United States of America v. Samuel Espinoza-Molina

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
SAMUEL ESPINOZA-MOLINA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-10588
D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00019-SRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 15, 2013**
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Samuel Espinoza-Molina appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 48-month sentence for possession with
intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(D).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Espinoza-Molina’s counsel
FILED
OCT 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-10588 2
has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to
withdraw as counsel of record. Espinoza-Molina has filed a pro se supplemental
brief. No answering brief has been filed.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --