United States v. Cedric Jackson

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10123 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:05-cr-00098-LRH-2 v. MEMORANDUM* CEDRIC JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 12, 2019** Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Cedric Jackson appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking his supervised release and challenges the 24-month sentence, which was ordered to run consecutive to the state sentence he is currently serving. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Jackson’s counsel has filed a brief stating that * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Jackson 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. AFFIRMED. 2 18-10123