United States of America v. Clara Ines Carrion-Ramirez

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).
DAT/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CLARA INES CARRION-RAMIREZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-50583
D.C. No. 8:07-cr-00265-AG
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Clara Ines Carrion-Ramirez appeals from her guilty-plea conviction and 37-
month sentence imposed for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Carrion-Ramirez’s
FILED
MAR 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

DAT/Research 08-50583 2
counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion
to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062
(9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it
delete from the judgment the incorrect reference to § 1326(b)(2). See United States
v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to
delete the reference to § 1326(b)).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s
judgment is AFFIRMED but REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --