United States v. Kevin Gaethle , 548 F. App'x 406 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             DEC 06 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 12-30361
    Plaintiff - Appellee,             D.C. No. 9:12-cr-00017-DLC
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    KEVIN KENNETH GAETHLE,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Montana
    Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge, Presiding
    Submitted November 19, 2013**
    Before:        CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    Kevin Kenneth Gaethle appeals from the district court’s judgment and
    challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 51-month sentence for robbery affecting
    commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a) and 2. Pursuant to Anders v.
    California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), Gaethle’s counsel has filed a brief stating that
    *
    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).
    there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of
    record. We have provided Gaethle the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental
    brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.
    Gaethle waived his right to appeal the reasonableness of his sentence and the
    conditions of his term of supervised release as long as his sentence was within or
    below the Guidelines range calculated by the district court. Because Gaethle’s
    sentence satisfies this condition, and the record discloses no arguable issue as to
    the validity of the waiver, we dismiss the appeal to the extent it challenges the
    reasonableness of his sentence and the supervised release conditions imposed by
    the court. See United States v. Watson, 
    582 F.3d 974
    , 988 (9th Cir. 2009). As to
    the remainder of the appeal, 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 in part; DISMISSED in part.
    2                                    12-30361
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-30361

Citation Numbers: 548 F. App'x 406

Filed Date: 12/6/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021