United States of America v. Julio Bayron-Arriola, a.k.a. Julio Bayron Estrada-Arriola

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JULIO BAYRON-ARRIOLA, a.k.a. Julio
Bayron Estrada-Arriola,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-10099
17-10100
D.C. No. 4:16-cr-00736-RCC
4:12-cr-00939-RCC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 23, 2017**
Before: LEAVY, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Julio Bayron-Arriola appeals his guilty-plea
conviction and 46-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8
U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive 8-month
sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
OCT 27 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-10099 & 17-10100
(1967), Bayron-Arriola’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 Bayron-Arriola the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No
pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Bayron-Arriola waived his right to appeal his conviction, the revocation of
supervised release, and his sentences. Our independent review of the record
pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as
to the validity of the waivers. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88
(9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeals. See id. at 988.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --