Case ID: f-appx_235/html/0630-02.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. Nekolas M. EVANS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-10668.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Aug. 13, 2007 .
    Filed Aug. 22, 2007.
    Office of the U.S. Attorney Oakland, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Christopher Johns, Esq., Johns & Allyn, A Professional Corporation, San Rafael, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KLEINFELD, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Nekolas M. Evans appeals from the district court’s decision upon remand that it would not have sentenced Evans to a materially different sentence.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Evans’ counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief has been filed. The government has filed notification that it does not intend to file an answering brief.

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, 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.