Court Opinion

ID: 623352
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-02-23 01:04:23+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:20.495587
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FILED
                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                          FEB 22 2012

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                         U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 11-10220

               Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 3:09-cr-08126-NVW

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
KEVIN JAMES BELONE,

               Defendant - Appellant.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                             for the District of Arizona
                      Neil V. Wake, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted February 21, 2012 **

Before:        FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

       Kevin James Belone appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month

sentence for voluntary manslaughter, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1112 and 1153.

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

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

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                                    11-10220