USA V. JESUS FRIAS-VIRAMONTES, No. 14-10003 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 01 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 14-10003 D.C. No. 4:13-cr-01223-JGZ v. MEMORANDUM* JESUS FRIAS-VIRAMONTES, a.k.a. Jesus Frias, a.k.a. J. Jesus FriasViramontes, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Linda R. Reade, District Judge, Presiding** Submitted August 25, 2015*** Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation. *** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Jesus Frias-Viramontes appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Frias-Viramontes’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 Frias-Viramontes 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 on direct appeal. The record reflects that Frias-Viramontes pleaded guilty to reentry after deportation, not to attempted reentry after deportation. We remand the case to the district court to correct the judgment. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment. 2 14-10003

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.