NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 22 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DUANE THOMAS LEE, No. 18-16965

Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. Nos. 3:16-cv-08138-JAT

3:05-cr-00594-JAT-1 v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MEMORANDUM*

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 14, 2023** Before: FERNANDEZ, FRIEDLAND, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Duane Thomas Lee appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) for discharging a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Lee’s counsel has

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Lee 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 that the certified issues provide no basis for appellate relief. See Graves v. McEwen, 731 F.3d 876, 880-81 (9th Cir. 2013); see also United States v. Begay, 33 F.4th 1081, 1093-96 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 143 S. Ct. 340 (2022).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

2 18-16965