Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene M. FULKS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-02-16
Citations: 711 F. App'x 447
Docket Number: No. 17-10316
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene M. FULKS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 711
Pages: 447–448

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene M. FULKS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-10316
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted February 13, 2018
Filed February 16, 2018
Larry Butrick, DOJ — Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee
Eugene M. Fulks, Pro Se
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, 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
Eugene M. Fulks appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the revocation of supervised release and six-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Fulks'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 Fulks 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. 76, 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.