From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lewis v. Miller

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Nov 21, 2016
No. 13-16078 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2016)

Opinion

No. 13-16078

11-21-2016

CANDICE LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WALTER MILLER, Respondent-Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00423-TLN MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Candice Lewis appeals from the district court's order denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Lewis'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 Lewis 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 briefing and record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses that the certified issue provides no basis for appellate relief. See Graves v. McEwen, 731 F.3d 876, 880-81 (9th Cir. 2013).

Counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Lewis v. Miller

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Nov 21, 2016
No. 13-16078 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2016)
Case details for

Lewis v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:CANDICE LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WALTER MILLER, Respondent-Appellee.

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Nov 21, 2016

Citations

No. 13-16078 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2016)