United States v. Joel Parker

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 08 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-10108
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:06-CR-00109-PMP
v.
MEMORANDUM *
JOEL K. PARKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Philip M. Pro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Joel K. Parker appeals from the district court’s order denying his pro se
motion to dismiss his indictment on double jeopardy and collateral estoppel
*
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).
EF/Research
grounds. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Parker’s counsel
has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to
withdraw as counsel of record. The appellant has filed a pro se supplemental brief.
The government has not filed an answering brief.
Our review of the record indicates that we lack jurisdiction over this
interlocutory appeal because Parker failed to raise a “colorable” double jeopardy
claim. See, e.g., United States v. Bhatia, 545 F.3d 757, 759 (9th Cir. 2008); see
also United States v. Zone, 403 F.3d 1101, 1104 (9th Cir. 2005) (per curiam).
Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw in this appeal is GRANTED, and the
appeal is DISMISSED.
EF/Research 2 09-10108