You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

United States v. Hernandez-Soto

Citation: 74 F. App'x 832Docket: No. 02-10081; D.C. No. CR-01-00333-RCC

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; September 15, 2003; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Arturo Hernandez-Soto appeals a 60-month sentence for illegal reentry following deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1326. His counsel has submitted a brief asserting no arguable issues for appeal and has requested to withdraw. No additional briefs were filed by Hernandez-Soto. An independent review of the record, in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, reveals no issues that warrant further consideration. Consequently, the court grants the motion for counsel to withdraw and affirms the district court's judgment. The decision is designated as not suitable for publication and is subject to specific citation restrictions under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Lower Court's Judgment

Application: The court affirms the district court's judgment after determining that there are no arguable issues for appeal.

Reasoning: Consequently, the court grants the motion for counsel to withdraw and affirms the district court's judgment.

Independent Judicial Review under Penson v. Ohio

Application: The court conducted an independent review of the record to ensure no issues required further consideration, following the procedure established in Penson v. Ohio.

Reasoning: An independent review of the record, in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, reveals no issues that warrant further consideration.

Publication and Citation Restrictions under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

Application: The decision is not designated for publication and carries specific restrictions on citation under the Ninth Circuit's rules.

Reasoning: The decision is designated as not suitable for publication and is subject to specific citation restrictions under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Review of Counsel's Request to Withdraw under Anders v. California

Application: The court reviews counsel's request to withdraw from representation, assessing whether any arguable issues for appeal exist.

Reasoning: His counsel has submitted a brief asserting no arguable issues for appeal and has requested to withdraw.