United States v. Enrique Torres-Chairez , 434 F. App'x 715 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              MAY 27 2011
    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. 08-10557
    Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 2:07-cr-01008-ROS
    ENRIQUE TORRES-CHAIREZ, a.k.a.
    Linio Monsivais-Landero, a.k.a. Enrique          MEMORANDUM *
    Torres,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 08-10558
    Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 2:01-cr-01025-ROS
    v.
    ENRIQUE TORRES-CHAIREZ, a.k.a.
    Linio Monsivais-Landero, a.k.a. Enrique
    Torres,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    Roslyn O. Silver, Chief Judge, Presiding
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    Submitted May 24, 2011 **
    Before:        PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    In these consolidated appeals, Enrique Torres-Chairez appeals from his
    guilty-plea conviction and 41-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in
    violation of 
    8 U.S.C. § 1326
    , and from the revocation of his supervised release and
    eight-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California,
    
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), Torres-Chairez’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 judgments are AFFIRMED.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    2                                    08-10557
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-10557, 08-10558

Citation Numbers: 434 F. App'x 715

Judges: Paez, Pregerson, Thomas

Filed Date: 5/27/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023