United States of America v. John Penitani

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JOHN PENITANI,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10394
D.C. No.
1:13-cr-00653-SOM-1
MEMORANDUM*
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JOHN PENITANI,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10410
D.C. No.
1:13-cr-00514-SOM-3
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Susan Oki Mollway, Chief Judge, Presiding
FILED
JUL 25 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

-- 1 of 3 --

Submitted July 21, 2016**
Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
John Penitani appeals from the district court’s judgments and challenges his
guilty-plea convictions and concurrent 168-month sentences for one count of
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 50 grams of
methamphetamine and another count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with
intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, all in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), Penitani’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no
grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have
provided Penitani 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 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Penitani’s convictions.
We accordingly affirm his convictions.
Penitani has waived his right to appeal his sentences. Because the record
discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
2

-- 2 of 3 --

appeals as to his sentences. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88
(9th Cir. 2009).
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
3

-- 3 of 3 --