Case ID: f-appx_661/html/0467-01.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. John PENITANI, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Penitani, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-10394, No. 15-10410
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 21, 2016
    
    Filed July 25, 2016
    Chris Alan Thomas, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee
    Pamela O’Leary Tower, Attorney, Pamela O’Leary Tower Attorney at Law, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

John Penitani appeals from the district court’s judgments and challenges his guilty-plea convictions and concurrent 168-month sentences for one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 50 grams of methamphetamine and another count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, all in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Penitani’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 Penitani 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Penitani’s convictions. We accordingly affirm his convictions.

Penitani has waived his right to appeal his sentences. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the appeals as to his sentences. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

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