United States of America v. Onecimo Nunez-Rodriguez

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ONECIMO NUNEZ-RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10335
D.C. No. 4:10-cr-02859-RCC-
CRP-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Onecimo Nunez-Rodriguez appeals his conviction by guilty plea and
sentence for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a),
with a sentencing enhancement pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2).
FILED
APR 18 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10335 2
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Nunez-Rodriguez’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 Nunez-Rodriguez the
opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental 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.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --