Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark Anthony SIMMONS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-12-20
Citations: 707 F. App'x 881
Docket Number: No. 17-10047
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark Anthony SIMMONS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 707
Pages: 881–882

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark Anthony SIMMONS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-10047
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted December 18, 2017
Filed December 20, 2017
Erica McCallum, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU-Office of the US Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Mark Anthony Simmons, Pro Se
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Mark Anthony Simmons appeals from the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct, 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Simmons'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 Simmons 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.