United States v. Francisco Ozuna

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 23 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-50539 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00352-PSG v. MEMORANDUM * FRANCISCO OZUNA, a.k.a. Chico, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 17, 2012 ** Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Francisco Ozuna appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 151-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(A)(viii), and * 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). distribution of and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, 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), Ozuna’s 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, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.1 1 Appellant’s January 3, 2012, motion requesting leave to file late supplemental excerpts of record is denied as moot because the supplemental excerpts were accepted for filing. 2 10-50539