Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Elaine ALEXANDER, aka Elaine Guidotti, Defendant- Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-13
Citations: 56 F. App'x 353
Docket Number: No. 99-10545; D.C. No. CR-94-20099-RMW
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Elaine ALEXANDER, aka Elaine Guidotti, Defendant— Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 56
Pages: 353–354

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Elaine ALEXANDER, aka Elaine Guidotti, Defendant— Appellant.
No. 99-10545.
D.C. No. CR-94-20099-RMW.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 10, 2003.
Decided Feb. 13, 2003.
Before LEAVY, FERNANDEZ and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Elaine Aexander appeals her jury-trial conviction and 18-month sentence for mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Aexander's counsel has filed a brief stating that he finds no meritorious issues for review, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
Our examination of the briefs and our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no arguable issues for review on direct appeal.
Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court's judgment 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.