USA V. JOSE GONZALEZ-VENEGAS, No. 14-10006 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 24 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 14-10006 D.C. No. 4:13-cr-01556-RCC v. MEMORANDUM* JOSE JOEL GONZALEZ-VENEGAS, a.k.a. Jose Gonzalez-Venegas, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Linda R. Reade, District Judge, Presiding** Submitted February 17, 2015*** Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. Jose Joel Gonzalez-Venegas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for attempted reentry * 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 Judge of the United States District Court 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). after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Gonzalez-Venegas’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 Gonzalez-Venegas the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. Gonzalez-Venegas has waived his right to appeal his conviction and 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. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. DISMISSED. 2 14-10006

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.