United States v. Martin Garcia-Gonzalez ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                          JAN 18 2019
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    18-30098
    Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:17-cr-00286-JLR
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    MARTIN GARCIA-GONZALEZ,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Washington
    James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted January 15, 2019**
    Before:      TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    Martin Garcia-Gonzalez appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 20-month sentence for illegal reentry
    after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), Garcia-Gonzalez’s counsel has filed a brief
    *
    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).
    stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as
    counsel of record. We have provided Garcia-Gonzalez the opportunity to file a pro
    se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
    filed.
    Garcia-Gonzalez waived his right to appeal his conviction 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. See United
    States v. Watson, 
    582 F.3d 974
    , 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss
    the appeal. See 
    id. at 988.
    We decline to address on direct appeal Garcia-Gonzalez’s claim of
    ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Rahman, 
    642 F.3d 1257
    ,
    1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).
    In accordance with United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 
    222 F.3d 1057
    , 1062
    (9th Cir. 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions to correct
    the judgment to exclude the reference to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1). See United States
    v. Herrera-Blanco, 
    232 F.3d 715
    , 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to
    delete from judgment reference to section 1326(b)).
    Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
    DISMISSED; REMANDED to correct the judgment.
    2                                   18-30098