NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 21 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-50221
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 5:18-cr-00279-PA-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
DAVID ANTHONY HURTADO, Jr., AKA
David Huntain Huntain, AKA David
Anthony Huntann,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Percy Anderson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
David Anthony Hurtado, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea convictions and aggregate 240-month sentence for
possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(viii), and being a felon in possession of a firearm and
ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Hurtado’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 Hurtado the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental
brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Hurtado waived his right to appeal his convictions, with the exception of an
appeal based on a claim that his pleas were involuntary. Hurtado also waived the
right to appeal most aspects of his sentence. Our independent review of the record
pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds
for relief as to the voluntariness of Hurtado’s pleas or any aspect of the sentence
that falls outside the scope of the appeal waiver. We, therefore, affirm as to those
issues. Having found no arguable issues as to the enforceability of the appeal
waiver, we dismiss the remainder of the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582
F.3d 974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 20-50221