United States of America v. Patricia Gaudron

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
PATRICIA GAUDRON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 23-643
D.C. No. 3:22-cr-02041-CAB-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 17, 2024**
Before: S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Patricia Gaudron appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges
her jury-trial conviction, time-served sentence, and two-year term of supervised
release for transportation of certain aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
§ 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JAN 24 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 23-643
Gaudron’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 Gaudron
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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal as to
Gaudron’s conviction, custodial sentence, term of supervised release, and special
conditions of supervision. However, the record reflects that the district court did
not orally pronounce or incorporate by reference the 13 standard supervised release
conditions included in the written judgment. In light of United States v. Montoya,
82 F.4th 640 (9th Cir. 2023) (en banc), which was decided after the district court
entered judgment in this case, we vacate those conditions and remand for the
limited purpose of permitting the district court to orally pronounce any standard
conditions it wishes to reimpose and to give Gaudron an opportunity to object. See
id. at 656.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is DENIED without prejudice to renewal in
the district court.
AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; and REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --