United States v. Nunn
This text of 71 F. App'x 642 (United States v. Nunn) 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
[643]*643MEMORANDUM
Carl Nunn appeals the revocation of his supervised release, and the 14-month sentence imposed upon the revocation.
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Nunn has filed a brief stating that there are no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Nunn 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 further issues for review. 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
71 F. App'x 642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nunn-ca9-2003.