USA V. ANTONIO CASTRO-GUZMAN, No. 11-50029 (9th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED APR 25 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 11-50029 D.C. No. 8:04-cr-00205-JVS v. MEMORANDUM * ANTONIO CASTRO-GUZMAN, a.k.a. Anthony Castro, Jr., a.k.a. Anthony Guzman, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 17, 2012 ** Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Anthony Castro-Guzman appeals from the district court s judgment revoking his supervised release and the 12-month and one-day sentence imposed * 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). upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), CastroGuzman 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 CastroGuzman with 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, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. We are in receipt of Castro-Guzman s letter dated January 10, 2012. To the extent he wishes to assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to address it on direct appeal as the record is insufficiently developed and his legal representation was not so inadequate that it can be concluded at this point that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. See United States v. McKenna, 327 F.3d 830, 845 (9th Cir. 2003) ( Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are generally inappropriate on direct appeal. ). Counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. 2 11-50029
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
