United States v. Skavinsky
This text of 58 F. App'x 741 (United States v. Skavinsky) 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
Thomas Joseph Skavinsky, Sr. appeals the revocation of supervised release and imposition of a ten-month sentence, following his violation of a special condition set forth in his original sentence for violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841.
Counsel for Skavinsky 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 he is unable to find issues that warrant review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Skavinsky 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 issues for review. Because we find the appeal to be without merit, 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
58 F. App'x 741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-skavinsky-ca9-2003.