From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Standley

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 18, 2008
264 F. App'x 570 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-30233.

Submitted January 14, 2008.

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

Filed January 18, 2008.

James E. Seykora, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Mark S. Werner, Esq., Federal Defenders of Montana, Billings, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana, Wm. Fremming Nielsen, Senior District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CE-02-00089-WFN.

Before: HALL, O'SCANNLAIN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Jack Standley appeals from his sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Standley's counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We provided Standley with an 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, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Standley

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 18, 2008
264 F. App'x 570 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

U.S. v. Standley

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jack STANDLEY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jan 18, 2008

Citations

264 F. App'x 570 (9th Cir. 2008)