Case ID: f-appx_515/html/0684-01.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. HUI QIANG YAN, a.k.a. Hui Chang, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-10641.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 16, 2013.
    
    Filed April 17, 2013.
    Garth R. Backe, Assistant U.S., USNMI-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sai-pan, MP, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Ramon King Quichocho, Jr., Esquire, Counsel, Law Offices of Ramon K. Quicho-cho, LLC, Saipan, MP, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Hui Qiang Yan appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the three-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to unlawfully produce and transfer an identification document, in -violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(1), (a)(2), and (f). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Yan’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 Yan 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.