Case Name: Candice LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Walter MILLER, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-21
Citations: 670 F. App'x 927
Docket Number: No. 13-16078
Parties: Candice LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Walter MILLER, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 927–928

Head Matter:
Candice LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Walter MILLER, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 13-16078
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted November 16, 2016
Filed November 21, 2016
Candice Lewis, Pro Se, Chowchilla, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
Darren Indermill, Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: LEAVY, BERZON, 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
Candice Lewis appeals from the district court's order denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Lewis'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 Lewis 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 briefing and record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses that the certified issue provides no basis for appellate relief. See Graves v. McEwen, 731 F.3d 876, 880-81 (9th Cir. 2013).
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.