United States v. Michel Martinez

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 6 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-10209
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:09-cr-00829-RCC-JR-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MICHEL MARTINEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 3, 2020**
Before: MURGUIA, CHRISTEN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
Michel Martinez appeals from the district court’s denial, after remand, of his
motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment
782. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Martinez’s counsel
has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Martinez 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.
The government’s motion to allow late filing of its Anders letter is denied as
unnecessary.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
2 19-10209