Case ID: f-appx_234/html/0492-01.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. William J. LAWRENCE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-30579.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 5, 2007.
    
    Filed June 7, 2007.
    Joseph H. Harrington, Esq., USSP—Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Dan B. Johnson, Esq., Spokane, WA, for DefendanL-Appellant.
    Before: LEAVY, RYMER and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

William J. Lawrence appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 168-month sentence for credit union robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lawrence’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Lawrence has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. The government has filed a motion for summary affirmance

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 grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, the government’s motion for summary affirmance is DENIED as moot, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.