United States of America v. Marcos Noe Covarrubias, a.k.a. Marcos Covarrubias, a.k.a. Edgar Covarrubias

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARCOS NOE COVARRUBIAS, a.k.a.
Marcos Covarrubias, a.k.a. Edgar
Covarrubias,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-50027
D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00592-PSG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 26, 2016**
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Marcos Noe Covarrubias appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 46-month sentence for being an illegal
alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
FILED
AUG 01 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Covarrubias’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 Covarrubias the
opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or
answering brief has been filed.
Covarrubias waived his right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of
an appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary. He also waived the right
to appeal his sentence, with the exception of the court’s calculation of his criminal
history category. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v.
Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to the
voluntariness of Covarrubias’s plea or the criminal history category calculated by
the court. We therefore affirm as to those issues. We dismiss the remainder of the
appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d
974, 988 (9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
15-50027 2

-- 2 of 2 --