Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andre MOORE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-12-09
Citations: 52 F. App'x 377
Docket Number: No. 00-10302; D.C. No. CR-98-00727-DAE
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andre MOORE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GOODWIN, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 52
Pages: 377–377

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andre MOORE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-10302.
D.C. No. CR-98-00727-DAE.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 2, 2002.
Decided Dec. 9, 2002.
Before GOODWIN, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Andre Moore appeals the district court's denial of his pro se motion to correct his term of probation. Moore's counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Moore has not filed a pro se supplemental brief, and appellee did not file an answering brief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and we affirm.
Our review of the Anders brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), does not reveal any arguable issues for appeal. Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw as counsel of record is GRANTED, and the district court's order 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.