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. Serna-Escalante

Citation: 101 F. App'x 255Docket: No. 03-10301; D.C. No. CR-02-05473-AWI

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; June 18, 2004; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Vicente Serna-Escalante appeals his conviction and 70-month sentence for being a deported alien found in the United States, violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Following the precedent set in Anders v. California, Serna-Escalante's counsel filed a brief indicating there are no grounds for relief and requested to withdraw as counsel. Serna-Escalante did not submit a pro se supplemental brief. An independent review of the record, in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, revealed no grounds for relief. Consequently, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the district court's judgment is affirmed. This decision is not to be published and cannot be cited in this circuit, except as specified by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Anders Brief Procedure

Application: The court followed the Anders procedure where the defense counsel submitted a brief indicating no grounds for relief, and requested to withdraw from the case.

Reasoning: Following the precedent set in Anders v. California, Serna-Escalante's counsel filed a brief indicating there are no grounds for relief and requested to withdraw as counsel.

Appeal under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)

Application: The defendant, Vicente Serna-Escalante, appealed his conviction and sentence for re-entering the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Reasoning: Vicente Serna-Escalante appeals his conviction and 70-month sentence for being a deported alien found in the United States, violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Independent Review of the Record

Application: The court conducted an independent review of the case record, consistent with Penson v. Ohio, and found no grounds for relief.

Reasoning: An independent review of the record, in accordance with Penson v. Ohio, revealed no grounds for relief.

Non-Publication and Citation Restrictions

Application: The decision in this case is not to be published and cannot be cited in this circuit, except under specific circumstances outlined by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Reasoning: This decision is not to be published and cannot be cited in this circuit, except as specified by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.