United States of America v. Cornelio Mata Espinoza

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
CORNELIO MATA ESPINOZA,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 12-10228
D.C. No. 3:09-cr-00103-CRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 15, 2013**
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Cornelio Mata Espinoza appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 250-month sentence for conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute and to distribute heroin and methamphetamine, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(i), and (b)(1)(A)(viii). Pursuant to
FILED
OCT 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-10228 2
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Espinoza’s counsel has filed a brief
stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as
counsel of record. Espinoza has filed pro se supplemental opening and reply
briefs, and the government has filed an answering brief.
Espinoza waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. 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 waiver. See United
States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss
the appeal. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --