Court Opinion

ID: 2647822
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-12-30 21:03:20.228103+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:32:39.388425
License: Public Domain

FILED
                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            DEC 30 2013

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 13-30073

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:12-cr-00062-RSL

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
JEREMY McCROREY,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Washington
                     Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted December 17, 2013**

Before:        GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

       Jeremy McCrorey appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

his guilty-plea conviction and 72-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute

controlled substances, 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), McCrorey’s counsel

          *
             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).
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 McCrorey 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 as to McCrorey’s

conviction. We accordingly affirm the conviction.

      McCrorey waived the right to appeal his sentence. Because the record

discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the sentencing waiver, we dismiss

McCrorey’s appeal as to his sentence. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974,

986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).

      Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

      AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

                                           2                                     13-30073