NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 2 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 17-10032
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 1:15-cr-00236-LJO
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ROBERT MICHAEL NUNEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 26, 2017**
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Robert Michael Nunez appeals from the revocation of supervised release and
the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Nunez’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
*
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).
provided Nunez 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 17-10032