Daniel Bisher v. United States

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 6 2014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