United States v. Thomas Medina Padilla

963 F.2d 381 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas Medina PADILLA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-10349. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 5, 1992. * Decided May 18, 1992. Before HUG, DAVID R. THOMPSON and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Thomas Medina Padilla appeals his sentence following a guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Counsel for Padilla initially filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel then filed a supplemental brief contending that Padilla was deprived of the benefit of his plea bargain when the district court based his offense level on the aggregate amount of drugs seized in the overall scheme. Because counsel's request to withdraw is moot, we review this case on the merits, considering the argument raised in Padilla's supplemental brief. We have…