United States v. Agrimson
This text of 145 F. App'x 612 (United States v. Agrimson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Mary Agrimson appeals her sentence imposed following the revocation of supervised release. Agrimson was convicted of [613]*613conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Agrimson has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Agrimson has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no grounds for relief. We therefore GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
145 F. App'x 612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-agrimson-ca9-2005.