Daniel Bisher v. United States , 585 F. App'x 342 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             OCT 6 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    DANIEL BISHER, a.k.a. Dan Bisher,                No. 13-35701
    a.k.a. Daniel W. Bisher, a.k.a. Daniel
    William Bisher, a.k.a. T.S. Bisher, a.k.a.       D.C. Nos.    2:12-cv-00250-EJL
    Clint Griffin,                                                2:10-cr-00206-EJL
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    MEMORANDUM*
    v.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Idaho
    Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted September 23, 2014**
    Before:        W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    Daniel Bisher appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C.
    § 2255 motion. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), Bisher’s
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a
    motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Bisher has filed a pro se supplemental
    brief. No 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. This court has concluded
    that the Controlled Substances Act does not violate the Tenth Amendment, see
    Raich v. Gonzales, 
    500 F.3d 850
    , 869 (9th Cir. 2007), and has rejected challenges
    to the constitutionality of Title 21, see United States v. Kim, 
    94 F.3d 1247
    , 1250 &
    n.3 (9th Cir. 1996). This court has also rejected challenges to the constitutionality
    of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). See United States v. Polanco, 
    93 F.3d 555
    , 563 (9th Cir.
    1996).
    Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    13-35701
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-35701

Citation Numbers: 585 F. App'x 342

Judges: Fletcher, Rawlinson, Christen

Filed Date: 10/6/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024