United States v. Monge
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Jesus Ricardo Monge appeals from his 135-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846.
[574]*574Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Monge’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 Monge the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
We have conducted an independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988). We dismiss the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid[574]*574ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
264 F. App'x 573 (United States v. Monge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.