United States v. Stephen Rhodes

Good Law
513 F. App'x 650
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 21, 201309-50577California145 words

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Stephen Rhodes appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Rhodes’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Rhodes the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

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.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.