Filed: Dec. 11, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 11 2009 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 07-30408 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. CR-05-00347-TSZ v. MEMORANDUM * HOANG MUNG THAI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Thomas S. Zilly, Senior District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 17, 2009 ** Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Summary: FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 11 2009 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 07-30408 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. CR-05-00347-TSZ v. MEMORANDUM * HOANG MUNG THAI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Thomas S. Zilly, Senior District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 17, 2009 ** Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. ..
More
FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 11 2009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. 07-30408
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. CR-05-00347-TSZ
v.
MEMORANDUM *
HOANG MUNG THAI,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Thomas S. Zilly, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009 **
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Hoang Mung Thai appeals from the 108-month sentence imposed upon a
remand for resentencing, following his guilty-plea conviction for possession with
*
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).
EF/Research
intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 18
U.S.C. § 2. Pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), Thai’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.
EF/Research 2 07-30408