U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2009

United States v. Brandon Dancy

United States v. Brandon Dancy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided December 16, 2009
357 F. App'x 932

United States v. Brandon Dancy

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 16 2009 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS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. 08-50550 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:08-cr-00114-VBF v. MEMORANDUM * BRANDON LAMAR DANCY, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Valerie Baker Fairbank, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 17, 2009 ** Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

Brandon Lamar Dancy appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 77- month sentence imposed for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

DAT/Research Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Dancy’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or 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.

DAT/Research 2 08-50550

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.