United States v. Francis Chandler, III

627 F. App'x 660
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 22, 2015
Docket14-10238
StatusUnpublished

This text of 627 F. App'x 660 (United States v. Francis Chandler, III) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Francis Chandler, III, 627 F. App'x 660 (9th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Francis Chandler III appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the order of restitution and the sentence of 37 months in prison and three years supervised release for making a false claim against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287, and filing false retaliatory hens against government officials, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1521. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Chandler’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 Chandler the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Chandler waived the right to appeal his sentence, with the exception of his right to challenge the restitution order and the part of the judgment concerning supervised release. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal as to the restitution order or supervised release. We therefore affirm as to those issues.

We dismiss the remainder of the appeal in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir.2009).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 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

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Watson
582 F.3d 974 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
627 F. App'x 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-francis-chandler-iii-ca9-2015.