Case ID: f-appx_109/html/0853-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gordon J. BISHOP, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-30477.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 13, 2004.
    
    Decided Sept. 20, 2004.
    Klaus P. Richter, Esq., Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Mark S. Werner, Esq., Billings, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: PREGERSON, T.G. NELSON, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gordon Jay Bishop appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and imposing an 18-month sentence upon revocation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Bishop’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Bishop did not file a pro se supplemental brief, and the government did not file a brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.