Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott MAYNARD, a.k.a. Scott Allen Maynard, Defendant-Appellant; United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott Maynard, a.k.a. Scott Alan Maynard, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-06
Citations: 675 F. App'x 661
Docket Number: No. 15-10600, No. 15-10601
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott MAYNARD, a.k.a. Scott Allen Maynard, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott Maynard, a.k.a. Scott Alan Maynard, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 675
Pages: 661–662

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott MAYNARD, a.k.a. Scott Allen Maynard, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott Maynard, a.k.a. Scott Alan Maynard, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10600, No. 15-10601
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted February 2, 2017
Filed FEBRUARY 06, 2017
Krissa Marie Lanham, USPX—Office of the US Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Eric W. Kessler, Kessler Law Offices, Mesa, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant
Scott Maynard, 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).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
In these consolidated appeals, Scott Maynard appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 51-month sentence for failure to register as a convicted sex offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a), and the revocation of supervised release and consecutive 13-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Maynard'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 Maynard 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.