United States v. Pablo Aguian-Flores

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date filed: 2014-11-25
Citations:
Copy Citations
Click to Find Citing Cases
Combined Opinion
                                                                           FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             NOV 25 2014

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS



                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 13-10451

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 4:13-cr-00386-CKJ

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
PABLO AGUIAN-FLORES,

               Defendant - Appellant.


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                    Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted November 18, 2014**

Before:        LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

       Pablo Aguian-Flores appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 24-month sentence for reentry after

deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967), Aguian-Flores’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no

          *
             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).
grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have

provided Aguian-Flores 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

      Counsels’ motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      AFFIRMED.




                                          2                                 13-10451