United States v. Miller

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJune 26, 2025
Docket24-7575
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Miller (United States v. Miller) 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. Miller, (9th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 26 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-7575 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 1:21-cr-00011-TMB-MMS-1 v. MEMORANDUM* NANCY MARIE MILLER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 18, 2025**

Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and SUNG, Circuit Judges.

Nancy Marie Miller appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges her guilty-plea conviction and 60-month sentence for attempted

possession with intent to distribute controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) and 846.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Miller’s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), stating that there are no non-frivolous arguments for appeal. Miller has not

filed a pro se supplemental brief.

In the plea agreement, Miller waived her right to appeal the conviction and

sentence.

Our independent review of the record, see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80

(1988), discloses no non-frivolous issue as to whether the appeal waiver is

enforceable. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).

We therefore dismiss the appeal. See id. at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

DISMISSED.

2 24-7575

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)
United States v. Miller, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-miller-ca9-2025.