USA V. OLIVIA RODRIGUEZ, No. 12-50507 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED DEC 30 2013 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 12-50507 D.C. No. 3:11-cr-05233-DMS v. MEMORANDUM* OLIVIA RODRIGUEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 17, 2013** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Olivia Rodriguez appeals from the district court s judgment and challenges the 120-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for importation of methamphetamine and aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 * 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). (1967), Rodriguez 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 Rodriguez the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. Rodriguez has waived her right to appeal her 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. Rodriguez s pro se motion to set aside the Anders brief, appoint new counsel, and extend the deadline for filing a new brief is DENIED. Counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. DISMISSED. 2 12-50507

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.