Case ID: f-appx_700/html/0584-01.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. Merle Brandon MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-10043
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted October 23, 2017 
    
    OCTOBER 27, 2017
    Krissa Marie Lanham, USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Gail Gianasi Natale, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Merle Brandon Martin, Screven, GA, pro se. •
    Before: LEAVY, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Merle Brandon Martin appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and the 30-month sentence imposed for assault resulting in serious bodily injury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 113(a)(6). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Martin’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Martin the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Martin waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss the appeal. See id, at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.