Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Koran McKinley ALLEN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-10
Citations: 291 F. App'x 852
Docket Number: No. 06-50380
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Koran McKinley ALLEN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 291
Pages: 852–853

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Koran McKinley ALLEN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-50380.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 8, 2008.
Filed Sept. 10, 2008.
Becky S. Walker, Esq., Dorothy C. Kim, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.
James M. Crawford, Esq., Orange, CA, Koran McKinley Allen, U.S. Penitentiary, Adelanto, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Koran McKinley Allen appeals from the 319-month sentence imposed upon remand following his jury-trial conviction for conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d), and use of a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Allen's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Appellant has filed a pro se supplemental brief, the government has filed an answering brief, and appellant has filed a reply.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief 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 is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.