United States v. Kneedler
This text of 166 F. App'x 987 (United States v. Kneedler) 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
Nathaniel Shay Kneedler appeals from the guilty-plea conviction and sentence imposed for distribution of a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Kneedler has filed a brief stating that he finds no grounds for relief, along with a [988]*988motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Kneedler has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83, 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.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9 th 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
166 F. App'x 987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-kneedler-ca9-2006.