United States v. Rodulfo Lopez ( 2020 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 16 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 19-10399
19-10401
Plaintiff-Appellee,
D.C. Nos.
v. 4:19-cr-50043-DCB-EJM-1
4:19-cr-00274-DCB-EJM-1
RODULFO ROBLERO LOPEZ, AKA
Rodulfo Roblero, AKA Rodulofo Roblero,
AKA Rudulfo Roblero-Lopez, MEMORANDUM*
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 14, 2020**
Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Rodulfo Roblero Lopez appeals from his
guilty-plea conviction and 24-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in
violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of supervised release and
*
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).
consecutive 8-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Roblero Lopez’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 Roblero Lopez the opportunity to file a pro se
supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been
filed.
Roblero Lopez waived his right to appeal his conviction, the revocation of
supervised release, and his sentences. 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 waivers. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88
(9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss these appeals. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
2 19-10399 & 19-10401