Case ID: f-appx_81/html/0211-01.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. Stephen RHODES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-50046.
    D.C. No. CR-00-01221-MMM-01.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 10, 2003.
    
    Decided Nov. 14, 2003.
    Miriam A. Krinsky, Barbara A. Master-son, USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    
      Sung Park, Van Nuys, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before KOZINSKI, SILVERMAN and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Stephen Rhodes appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 262-month sentence for distribution of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Rhodes has filed a brief stating that there are no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Rhodes has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issues for review on direct appeal. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.