NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 27 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10441
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:16-cr-00355-SPL
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JAMES L. FORD, a.k.a. James Ford,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Steven P. Logan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 23, 2017**
Before: LEAVY, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
James L. Ford appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his
guilty-plea conviction and ten-month sentence for escape, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§§ 751(a) and 4082(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
Ford’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along
*
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).
with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We construe the letter submitted
by Ford on September 19, 2017, as a pro se supplemental brief. No answering
brief has been filed.
Ford waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our
independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United
States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss
the appeal. See id. at 988.
To the extent that Ford seeks to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel, we decline to address this issue on direct appeal. See United States v.
Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
DISMISSED.
2 16-10441