United States v. Javier Reyes-Ramirez

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 19, 2018
Docket17-10279
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Javier Reyes-Ramirez (United States v. Javier Reyes-Ramirez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Javier Reyes-Ramirez, (9th Cir. 2018).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 17-10279 17-10280 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 2:17-cr-00506-SPL v. 2:14-cr-01014-SPL

JAVIER REYES-RAMIREZ, a.k.a. Jose MEMORANDUM* Sergio Reyes-Mejorano,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Steven P. Logan, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 13, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

In these consolidated appeals, Javier Reyes-Ramirez appeals his guilty-plea

conviction and 41-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8

U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive 19-month

sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

* 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). (1967), Reyes-Ramirez’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 Reyes-Ramirez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No

pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Reyes-Ramirez 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 waiver. 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 17-10279 & 17-10280

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Watson
582 F.3d 974 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Javier Reyes-Ramirez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-javier-reyes-ramirez-ca9-2018.