United States v. Rutledge

4 F. App'x 441
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 21, 2001·No. No. 99-10528; D.C. No. CR-99-40033-CW·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM2

Eugene Darrel Rutledge appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). Rutledge’s counsel has filed a brief, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), stating that she finds no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record.

Rutledge has filed a supplemental pro se brief, contending that he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, and that the district court erred in sentencing him. Because the record on appeal is inadequate, we decline to entertain Rutledge’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim at this time. United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1060 (9th Cir.2000). Rutledge’s alleged sentencing errors are without merit.

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. We therefore, AFFIRM the judgment.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel of record is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Rutledge, 4 F. App'x 441 (9th Cir. 2001).

4 F. App'x 441 (United States v. Rutledge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
United States v. Pablo Rivera-Sanchez
222 F.3d 1057 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)