United States v. Kerry Seaman
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Kerry Seaman appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 44-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for wire fraud and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 2. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Seaman’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Seaman has filed a pro se supplemental brief and the government has filed an answering brief.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 , 109 S.Ct. 346 , 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
We decline to review Seaman’s pro se ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal because this is not one of the “unusual cases where (1) the record on appeal is sufficiently developed to permit determination of the issue, or (2) the legal representation is so inadequate that it obviously denies a defendant his Sixth Amendment right to counsel.” United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1260 (9th Cir.2011).