Court Opinion

ID: 4458872
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-11-25 21:00:33.888899+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:04:09.621498
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       NOV 25 2019
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No.    19-10031

                Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No.
                                                4:17-cr-00198-JAS-DTF-1
 v.

ALI MUKHTAR OSMAN,                              MEMORANDUM*

                Defendant-Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Arizona
                    James A. Soto, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted November 18, 2019**

Before:      CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

      Ali Mukhtar Osman appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his jury-trial conviction and sentence of time served plus ten days for

unlawful bringing in of a firearm or ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§§ 922(l), 924(a)(1)(C). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Osman’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 Osman 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      AFFIRMED.

                                          2                                    19-10031