United States of America v. Antonio Castro-Guzman, a.k.a. Anthony Castro, Jr., a.k.a. Anthony Guzman

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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.
ANTONIO CASTRO-GUZMAN, a.k.a.
Anthony Castro, Jr., a.k.a. Anthony
Guzman,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-50029
D.C. No. 8:04-cr-00205-JVS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Anthony Castro-Guzman appeals from the district court’s judgment
revoking his supervised release and the 12-month and one-day sentence imposed
FILED
APR 25 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-50029 2
upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Castro-
Guzman’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 Castro-
Guzman 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.
We are in receipt of Castro-Guzman’s letter dated January 10, 2012. To the
extent he wishes to assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to
address it on direct appeal as the record is insufficiently developed and his legal
representation was not so inadequate that it can be concluded at this point that he
was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. See United States v. McKenna,
327 F.3d 830, 845 (9th Cir. 2003) (“Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are
generally inappropriate on direct appeal.”).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --