United States v. Jefferson

FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 07 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S . CO U RT OF AP PE A LS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 07-50024
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. CR-03-00084-VAP-22
Central District of California,
v. Los Angeles
ALONSO JEFFERSON, a/µ/a Puppet,
ORDER
Defendant - Appellant.
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
We hereby recall the mandate issued on April 4, 2010. The memorandum
disposition filed on March 31, 2010, is withdrawn, and a replacement
memorandum disposition is filed contemporaneously with this order. The mandate
shall issue forthwith.
D RS/Research
FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 07 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S . CO U RT OF AP PE A LS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 07-50024
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. CR-03-00084-VAP
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ALONSO JEFFERSON, a/µ/a Puppet,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2010**
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Alonso Jefferson appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 240-month
sentence for conspiracy to manufacture, to aid and abet the manufacture of, and to
*
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).
D RS/Research
possess with intent to distribute phencyclidine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
yy 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846, and 18 U.S.C. y 2(a).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Jefferson's counsel
has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to
withdraw as counsel of record. Appellant has filed a pro se supplemental brief, but
no answering brief has been filed.
Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.
Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district
court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
D RS/Research 2 07-50024