United States v. Johnson
This text of 369 F. App'x 791 (United States v. Johnson) 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 **
Patrick Johnson appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 188-month sentence for possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute — cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(iii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Johnson’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. He has filed a supplemental brief, but no 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 arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Johnson’s request to strike the Anders brief and appoint new counsel is DENIED. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
369 F. App'x 791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-johnson-ca9-2010.