United States v. Leonel Villasenor

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 22 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 23-10020 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 4:03-cr-00717-DCB-JR-1 v. MEMORANDUM* LEONEL ERNESTO VILLASENOR, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 15, 2023** Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges. Leonel Ernesto Villasenor appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Villasenor’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as * 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). counsel of record. We have provided Villasenor 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. See United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021) (setting forth abuse of discretion standard for sentence reduction decisions under § 3582(c)(1)). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. 2 23-10020