United States v. David P. Ciglar

12 F.3d 1109 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David P. CIGLAR, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10070. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 6, 1993. * Decided Dec. 15, 1993. Before: SNEED, NOONAN and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 David Ciglar appeals his conviction for unlawful manufacture of more than 100 marijuana plants in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841 (a)(1). He received a sentence of 120 months after pleading guilty to the offense. We affirm. 3 Ciglar's appointed counsel filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). He thoroughly reviewed the record, found no arguments on which to base an appeal and moves to be relieved as counsel. Ciglar has not supplemented or opposed his attorney's brief. The government did not file an opposing brief. Before acting on the motion to withdraw, we must examine the record to determine whether counsel's evaluation was…