United States v. Oray Fifer
United States v. Oray Fifer
Opinion
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 23 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 15-30214 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 4:99-cr-00014-CCL-1 v. MEMORANDUM* ORAY PAPA FIFER, a.k.a. Duwayne Harris, a.k.a. Shawn Phillips, a.k.a.
Special, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Charles C. Lovell, Senior District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 19, 2016** Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
Oray Papa Fifer appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Fifer’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no * 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). grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Fifer the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. He 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 on direct appeal.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.