United States v. Ramon Bonilla-Galeas

Good Law
655 F. App'x 554
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 12, 201615-10374California429 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Ramon Bonilla-Galeas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Bonilla-Galeas’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 Bonil-la-Galeas 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 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief with respect to the conviction. We therefore affirm the conviction.

Bonilla-Galeas entered into a plea agreement that included an appeal waiver with respect to the sentence. The record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of that waiver except with respect to raising an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Because Bonilla-Galeas was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.