USA V. JUAN REYES-CASTANEDA, No. 09-30263 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 22 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 09-30263 D.C. No. 3:09-cr-05148-RBL v. MEMORANDUM* JUAN REYES-CASTANEDA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 16, 2013** Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Juan Reyes-Castaneda appeals from the district court s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 29-month and 1-week sentence for two counts of unlawful entry by eluding examination and inspection by immigration * 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). officers, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(2). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Reyes-Castaneda 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 Reyes-Castaneda 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Reyes-Castaneda s conviction. We accordingly affirm Reyes-Castaneda s conviction. Because Reyes-Castaneda completed his sentence during the pendency of this appeal, we dismiss Reyes-Castaneda s challenge to his sentence as moot. See United States v. Tapia-Martinez, 361 F.3d 535, 537 (9th Cir. 2004). Counsel s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part. 2 09-30263

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.