United States of America v. Benjapon Sakkarapope

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BENJAPON SAKKARAPOPE,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-10582
D.C. No. 2:11-cr-01695-JAT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Benjapon Sakkarapope appeals the district court’s order denying his motion
to dismiss with prejudice and granting the government’s motion to dismiss without
prejudice an indictment charging him with four counts of failure to depart, in
FILED
SEP 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-10582 2
violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1253(a)(1)(B). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967), Sakkarapope’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for
relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record and a motion to take
judicial notice of certain documents from the administrative record in
Sakkarapope’s removal proceedings. We have provided Sakkarapope the
opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or
answering brief has been filed.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Counsel’s motions to withdraw and to take judicial notice are GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --