United States v. Alejandro Leon ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FEB 18 2022
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       Nos. 21-30160
    21-30161
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    D.C. Nos. 4:20-cr-06021-SAB-1
    v.                                                       4:20-cr-06029-SAB-4
    ALEJANDRO LEON,
    MEMORANDUM*
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Washington
    Stanley A. Bastian, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted February 15, 2022**
    Before:      FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
    In these consolidated appeals, Alejandro Leon appeals from the district
    court’s judgments and challenges his guilty-plea convictions and aggregate 160-
    month sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in
    violation of 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 922
    (g)(1) and 924(a)(2), and conspiracy to provide
    *
    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).
    prohibited objects to an inmate and being an inmate in possession of a prohibited
    object, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 371
    , 1791. Pursuant to Anders v. California,
    
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), Leon’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no
    grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record in these
    consolidated appeals. We have provided Leon the opportunity to file a pro se
    supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
    filed.
    Leon waived his right to appeal his convictions and 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 with respect to
    Appeal No. 21-30161. See United States v. Watson, 
    582 F.3d 974
    , 986-88 (9th Cir.
    2009). We accordingly dismiss this appeal. See 
    id. at 988
    . However, we remand
    Appeal No. 21-30160 for the district court to reduce to the statutory maximum of
    three years the supervised release term imposed for the felon-in-possession
    conviction. See 
    18 U.S.C. § 3583
    (b)(2); see also Watson, 
    582 F.3d at 977
     (appeal
    waiver does not bar challenge to an illegal sentence).
    Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
    Appeal No. 21-30161 DISMISSED; Appeal No. 21-30160 REMANDED
    with instructions.
    2                          21-30160 & 21-30161
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-30160

Filed Date: 2/18/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2022