LAW.coLAW.co

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brittany Anne SEIBEL, a.k.a. Brittany Seibel, Defendant-Appellant

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit2012-03-09No. No. 10-10397
471 F. App'x 659

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

MEMORANDUM

Brittany Anne Seibel appeals from her jury-trial conviction and 60-month sentence for possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(l)(B)(vii). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Seibel’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with 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, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

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