United States of America v. Leonel Marin-Torres

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
LEONEL MARIN-TORRES,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-30106
D.C. No. 3:14-cr-00386-HZ-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2017**
Before: FARRIS, CANBY, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Leonel Marin-Torres appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges his conviction and 51-month sentence for assault of an officer, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 111(a) and (b). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), Marin-Torres’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no
FILED
NOV 17 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have
provided Marin-Torres the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro
se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
We affirm the judgment of the district court. The district court’s protective
order regarding discovery properly protected sensitive personnel information while
giving the defense ample access to the necessary information. See United States v.
Marin-Torres, 671 Fed.Appx. 468 (9th Cir. 1985). Marin-Torres’s disruptive
behavior justified the district court in revoking his self-representation and
providing for representation by standby counsel. See Faretta v. California, 422
U.S. 806, 834-35 n.46 (1975). The other contentions offered by the Anders brief
provide no basis for overturning the conviction or sentence. Finally, our
independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --