United States v. Ricardo Vega

Good Law
474 F. App'x 527
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 2, 201210-10447California269 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Ricardo Enrique Vega appeals from his jury-trial conviction and 240-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Vega’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. However, we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it strike the phrase “and payment” from special condition of supervised release number four on page six of the judgment because this part of the condition was included in the written judgment but not imposed at sentencing. See United States v. Napier, 463 F.3d 1040, 1042 (9th Cir.2006); United States v. Hicks, 997 F.2d 594, 597 (9th Cir.1993). We also instruct…

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.