United States v. Jose Jimenez

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 04 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 12-10448 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:11-cr-00903-WHA v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE JIMENEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California William Alsup, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 19, 2013** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Jose Jimenez appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 87-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and to possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; and possession of methamphetamine * 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). with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(viii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Jimenez’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 Jimenez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. Jimenez has waived his right to appeal his 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 12-10448