From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Rhodes

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 14, 2003
81 F. App'x 211 (9th Cir. 2003)

Opinion

Submitted November 10, 2003.

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding.

Page 212.

Miriam A. Krinsky, Barbara A. Masterson, USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Sung Park, Van Nuys, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.


Before KOZINSKI, SILVERMAN and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Stephen Rhodes appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 262-month sentence for distribution of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Rhodes has filed a brief stating that there are no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Rhodes has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable issues for review on direct appeal. Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Rhodes

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nov 14, 2003
81 F. App'x 211 (9th Cir. 2003)
Case details for

United States v. Rhodes

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen RHODES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Nov 14, 2003

Citations

81 F. App'x 211 (9th Cir. 2003)