United States v. McDonald
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Mario McDonald appeals from the 125-month sentence imposed following remand under United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1085 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), McDonald’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as [591]*591counsel of record. 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.
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
218 F. App'x 590 (United States v. McDonald) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.