Case ID: f-appx_668/html/0262-01.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. Craig William FRAZIER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-30135
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted August 12, 2016 
    
    Filed August 16, 2016
    Jessica Anne Betley, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Carl E. Rostad, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Craig William Frazier, Pro Se
    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

Frazier appeals from the district court’s order denying his “Rule 60(b) and 3582 Motion to Reduce Sentence.” Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Frazier’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 Frazier 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 on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R, 36-3.