United States of America v. Alejandro Munoz Galvan, a.k.a. Abel Lemus

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ALEJANDRO MUNOZ GALVAN, a.k.a.
Abel Lemus,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-10513
D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00115-TLN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 16, 2018**
Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Alejandro Munoz Galvan appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 196-month sentence for conspiracy to
distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. 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
JAN 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-10513
(1967), Galvan’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for
relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Galvan has filed a
pro se supplemental brief. No answering brief has been filed.
Galvan waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. 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 waiver. See United
States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss
the appeal. See id. at 988.
To the extent that Galvan seeks to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel, we decline to address this issue on direct appeal. See United States v.
Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --