Court Opinion

ID: 3039813
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-13 23:01:42.377662+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:54:01.623691
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             OCT 12 2010

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 09-30398

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00006-JLR

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
WILLIE JAMES EARL, Jr.,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Washington
                     James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted September 13, 2010 **

Before:        SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

       Willie James Earl, Jr. appeals from his 68-month sentence for conspiracy to

distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B), and 846.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Earl’s counsel has filed a

brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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.
75, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. We

dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d
1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      DISMISSED.

                                         2                                   09-30398